Warhammer - The Old World news and rumors

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.

**chaos0xomega**

Did they need it, no. Will it sell well, you bet. Theyre great sculpts that cover a bunch of gaps in the range, plus thsy telegraph intent for the rest of the range. Core resculpts wont be far behind.

**MajorWesJanson**

Or they do a range of character type models for each faction so they don't feel neglected, then come around and do resculpts.

**BorderCountess**

chaos0xomega wrote:
Did they need it, no. Will it sell well, you bet. Theyre great sculpts that cover a bunch of gaps in the range, plus thsy telegraph intent for the rest of the range. Core resculpts wont be far behind.

No, I think they needed it. Looking at warhammer.com, the ONLY plastic characters in their range are included with monsters.

**JWh85**

My bretts also currently don't have any plastic characters outside of the royal pegasus lord and currently no model available with either a hippogryph or on a warhorse though and I wouldn't say that my bretts have a dire need of plastic characters.

Tomb kings already had plenty character models already, albeit not on a horse; that is new. But to say that they needed these is a bit of a stretch i think.

I do think we'll get some character models with narrative arcane journals for the near future and i quite like that!

**Overread**

The TK models basically replace older metal models currently in their line. I see them as the first step toward steadily replacing the old models. We might see the old ones hang around or vanish when these new ones come out. Then we will hopeflully see a steady replacement of old things happening to all armies bit by bit.

**scarletsquig**

I'm just glad to see any new hard plastics for TOW.

If each faction gets a new plastic kit every year or so that would be plenty for long-term support of the game.

I think it'll settle into the pattern of blood bowl and necromunda in terms of releases over the long run.

**Albertorius**

Platuan4th wrote:
Setting wise, Beastmen were doing nothing in AoS aside from being punching bags in pretty much every other army's books where as they're a major player in ToW.

Dark Elves also still feature very heavily in two AoS armies, people just choose to stay with all the new human units for one of those.

So... like dwarves, I guess?

Also, I couldn't help but laught when I saw the Chaos Dwaves's AoS reveal... I think there's like one single thing for which there's no stats in the current Legacy list.

**streetsamurai**

Albertorius wrote:
Platuan4th wrote:
Setting wise, Beastmen were doing nothing in AoS aside from being punching bags in pretty much every other army's books where as they're a major player in ToW.

Dark Elves also still feature very heavily in two AoS armies, people just choose to stay with all the new human units for one of those.

So... like dwarves, I guess?

Also, I couldn't help but laught when I saw the Chaos Dwaves's AoS reveal... I think there's like one single thing for which there's no stats in the current Legacy list.

Yeah such a shame that the chorf are for AOS and not TOW.

Im no AOS fan, but i like the game better when it tries to be original (KO for example). When they "copy" so directly from WHFB, it only reminds me that it cant hold a candle to his predecessor

**BertBert**

streetsamurai wrote:

Yeah such a shame that the chorf are for AOS and not TOW.

Im no AOS fan, but i like the game better when it tries to be original (KO for example). When they "copy" so directly from WHFB, it only reminds me that it cant hold a candle to his predecessor

Sometimes they manage to pull it off and provide fantastic dual-use ranges. The recent skaven release was basically an update to large parts of their established roster, same with soulblight, seraphon and greenskins. With chaos dwarfs it feels like they wanted to have their cake and eat it, too, by pandering to the old guard and infuse the range with some of their more modern design cues at the same time. If they had fully committed to the design of the hashut warband or the bull centaur alternative build, that could've been something original and spectacular in the same vein as the Kharadron or Idoneth.

**Mr_Rose**

Albertorius wrote:
Platuan4th wrote:
Setting wise, Beastmen were doing nothing in AoS aside from being punching bags in pretty much every other army's books where as they're a major player in ToW.

Dark Elves also still feature very heavily in two AoS armies, people just choose to stay with all the new human units for one of those.

So... like dwarves, I guess?

Also, I couldn't help but laught when I saw the Chaos Dwaves's AoS reveal... I think there's like one single thing for which there's no stats in the current Legacy list.

Yeah, that’s a vey good point; only the K’Daii Fireborn (daemon-mecha ogres) don’t have a reasonable ish “counts as” in the new range or an existing model in either TOW or AoS. Though you’d probably want to convert the mortar to fire horizontally if you used it to represent the magma cannon. And the goblin spear chukka would need proper hobgrot crew.

**SU-152**

streetsamurai wrote:

Yeah such a shame that the chorf are for AOS and not TOW.

What exactly prevents using those models for TOW? GW-police? base size?

**Lathe Biosas**

SU-152 wrote:
streetsamurai wrote:

Yeah such a shame that the chorf are for AOS and not TOW.

What exactly prevents using those models for TOW? GW-police? base size?

Rules.

**scarletsquig**

It definitely feels like Chaos Dwarves should have been an old world release, but maybe its the only way the project got approval, for the sales to show up under the AoS sales category, even if half of them end up on square bases.

If I were an AoS player, my main concern going in would be that the army eventually gets "Old World Squatted" like Beasts of Chaos did.

It's a good way to get money from both playerbases, get people to buy it as an AoS army, then once sales falter in a decade or so, shove it in TOW to get a second round of profit out of it.

**chaos0xomega**

scarletsquig wrote:
It definitely feels like Chaos Dwarves should have been an old world release, but maybe its the only way the project got approval, for the sales to show up under the AoS sales category, even if half of them end up on square bases.

If I were an AoS player, my main concern going in would be that the army eventually gets "Old World Squatted" like Beasts of Chaos did.

It's a good way to get money from both playerbases, get people to buy it as an AoS army, then once sales falter in a decade or so, shove it in TOW to get a second round of profit out of it.

LMAO.

The real risk is the opposite occuring - TOW 2nd edition releases and GW doesnt update the Legacy factions leaving TOW legacy army fans with piles of unusable plastic, in the hopes that they then round base them and accept their lot as age of sigmar players.

**Just Tony**

chaos0xomega wrote:
scarletsquig wrote:
It definitely feels like Chaos Dwarves should have been an old world release, but maybe its the only way the project got approval, for the sales to show up under the AoS sales category, even if half of them end up on square bases.

If I were an AoS player, my main concern going in would be that the army eventually gets "Old World Squatted" like Beasts of Chaos did.

It's a good way to get money from both playerbases, get people to buy it as an AoS army, then once sales falter in a decade or so, shove it in TOW to get a second round of profit out of it.

LMAO.

The real risk is the opposite occuring - TOW 2nd edition releases and GW doesnt update the Legacy factions leaving TOW legacy army fans with piles of unusable plastic, in the hopes that they then round base them and accept their lot as age of sigmar players.

Man, you are STUCK on this, aren't you? Is GW going to send armed enforcers to take everyone's Legacy lists? Will GW enforcers show up at every club ensuring that nobody uses their AOS models in Old World or older versions of WFB? Do we still need to accept that AOS is the super special bestest and we all need to switch over before the plastic-pocalypse happens?

It must be exhausting to be this cynical...

I didn't delve too much into what the kit comes with, but I saw spears which makes me wonder if great weapons won't be part of the kit.

**lord_blackfang**

Just Tony wrote:

It must be exhausting to be this cynical...

Cynical how? Legacy is where rules go to die. Iif ToW ever gets a new edition chances are slim that current Legacy stuff is updated.

We'll get a good demo of ToW2 in a few days when HH 3.0 Legacy pdf drops, chock full of units freshly dropped from the main list... we'll see how much of previous Legacy survives, eh?

**chaos0xomega**

Yeah, not seeing the argument there Tony. Do you think TOW will live in stasis for forever? Lets take a look at how dramatic the changes to HH3.0 are to see an example of what GW can do with TOW2.0. They dont need to send enforcers to your house or whatever contrived bs you just spat out onto your keyboard to render your army unplayable.

That being said HH Legacies are very different to TOW legacies, in that GW actually encourages HH legacies for tournament play.

**Altruizine**

We just saw GW panic-react (yes-yes) to the wave of negativity that deprecating options in HH 3.0 produced, so I think it's likely that it influences their behaviour going forward. Players will get doubly mad over armies being abandoned (versus units or models), but there are also probably more HH players than TOW players to kick up a stink (although probably not that many more).

Most importantly, we have credible reports that the recent Horus Hatesy impacted sales for the Saturnine launch box. People can choose to dissemble and say that there were other reasons for the soft sales, like the unit makeup in the box or whatever, but I think that's copium. Nobody walked away from their preorder because they concluded that the models were sidegrades of things they already had, or inefficient building blocks for starting an army from scratch.

So then the question becomes, do you think TOW 2.0 is going to have a *real* launch product, or be another mish-mash of recyclables? To me it seems likely that it will be a real box, probably containing brand new plastics and probably even at least one brand new faction. Is GW going to risk poisoning their launch environment again by openly neglecting the Legacy factions? I doubt it.

**chaos0xomega**

Yes, absolutely.

GW didnt really panic react to anything, the plan for HH3 was what it is all along, they just suck at communicating it and didnt outline the nature of the legacies content up front (they did tell us it exists and that it would be tournament legal, but not what units and options would be in it until after the leaks came out). And the soft launch of the edition i think has less to do with unit cuts than it does with general disatisfaction with rules changes and business model (lots of disatisfaction with the "DLC" concept of journals tactica, which is already accepted as part of TOWs model, and fears kf tje 3 year cycle going forward) as a whole.

As it stands, the legacy factions in TOW are already the unwanted red-headed children of the game in GWs eyes (their strict no tournament policy vs HHs "yes we think these should be tournament legal" stance highlights this disparity). I wouldnt be surprised if someone in corporate regrets green-lighting their rules release entirely for all the trouble it seems to be causing them. And the thing is - Legacy fans are not really the market that GW is targeting or who they are measuring sales metrics by. Im sure there would be a backlash to them cutting Legacy support, but I dont think it will be significant enough for GW to care by that point.

**kodos**

GW already left the Legacy Factions behind with the latest update, there is no real chance that those are going to make it over to another Edition

for HH, we are going to see with the mid-Edition update of GW cares enough to keep them legal or leave them behind

GW is facing out old stuff in favour of new models, the handle it a little different in every game but in the end, legacy means it is removed from the game

and even sales numbers don't mean anything for those armies/units at the current point as GWs focus is on new people and they don't care about old models that aren't available anyway.
and those who already have them, even if bought with the current Edition, are not part of GWs target group any more

**Dryaktylus**

lord_blackfang wrote:
Just Tony wrote:

It must be exhausting to be this cynical...

Cynical how? Legacy is where rules go to die. Iif ToW ever gets a new edition chances are slim that current Legacy stuff is updated.

We'll get a good demo of ToW2 in a few days when HH 3.0 Legacy pdf drops, chock full of units freshly dropped from the main list... we'll see how much of previous Legacy survives, eh?

Just a few.

Spoiler:

**Altruizine**

chaos0xomega wrote:

GW didnt really panic react to anything, the plan for HH3 was what it is all along, they just suck at communicating it and didnt outline the nature of the legacies content up front (they did tell us it exists and that it would be tournament legal, but not what units and options would be in it until after the leaks came out).

Whether or not you buy into the conspiracy theory of the legacy pdf being heavily altered (I generally do not), it is indisputable that they panic-reacted by publishing the unscheduled WarCom article apologizing for making waves and listing a bunch of legacy units.

Also, since I didn't follow the HH rollout that closely: did they announce the tournament legality of the legacy units in the first announcement that there would be legacy units, or in the apology article?

**chaos0xomega**

No the tournament legality was stated from the getgo, i believe it was even discussed in the Saturnine preview livestream iirc.

It was already old news by the time the supposedly unscheduled panic article (zero evidence of this, that they added a paragraph addressing community concerns is not uncommon) was published.

**SU-152**

Lathe Biosas wrote:
SU-152 wrote:
streetsamurai wrote:

Yeah such a shame that the chorf are for AOS and not TOW.

What exactly prevents using those models for TOW? GW-police? base size?

Rules.

Yeah. Which are free by GW, and even expanded by SquareBased.

**Altruizine**

chaos0xomega wrote:
No the tournament legality was stated from the getgo, i believe it was even discussed in the Saturnine preview livestream iirc.

It was already old news by the time the supposedly unscheduled panic article (zero evidence of this, that they added a paragraph addressing community concerns is not uncommon) was published.

If you think it was coincidence that a communique about the legacy inclusions just happened to be scheduled a week after leaks made everyone freak out (and was just coincidentally the very next article after the leaks became widespread) I dunno what to tell you.

July 9/10 liber leaks happen.
July 11 WarCom posts the Learn to Play video (entirely likely that this was prescheduled for that day)
July 12 preorder article (obviously prescheduled)
*multiple day of silence about HH*
July 16 legacy apology article

**Dryaktylus**

Altruizine wrote:
chaos0xomega wrote:

GW didnt really panic react to anything, the plan for HH3 was what it is all along, they just suck at communicating it and didnt outline the nature of the legacies content up front (they did tell us it exists and that it would be tournament legal, but not what units and options would be in it until after the leaks came out).

Whether or not you buy into the conspiracy theory of the legacy pdf being heavily altered (I generally do not), it is indisputable that they panic-reacted by publishing the unscheduled WarCom article apologizing for making waves and listing a bunch of legacy units.

Also, since I didn't follow the HH rollout that closely: did they announce the tournament legality of the legacy units in the first announcement that there would be legacy units, or in the apology article?

23.05.2025

What’s more, there will be a range of Legacy PDFs coming out over the next few months, allowing players to deploy classic miniatures and factions from their collections.

02.07.2025

The Liber books deal with units which are part of the current Horus Heresy miniatures range, but there have been many units with rules in past editions which never had miniatures, or which have left the range.

You may absolutely still use these rules and miniatures in your games, using the Legacies of the Age of Darkness PDF. Units will clearly be marked as “core” or “legacy”, but there are no restrictions on using them, either in casual play or at tournaments. Tournament organisers may choose to exclude certain units from their events, but because this game system leans more towards the narrative side of things, the current plan is that all official Warhammer-run events will allow legacy units.

**Londinium**

scarletsquig wrote:

I think it'll settle into the pattern of blood bowl and necromunda in terms of releases over the long run.

God I hope not, Blood Bowl has seen barely any releases in the last year. There was a time when it was consistently getting 3/4 teams a year, now it's averaging about 1 team a year and a smattering of star players.