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.

No the chaos associated designs were actually around in the heresy.

If they do it as Battlefleet Heresy i think you'll see all of the Imperial stuff, Chaos stuff and Marine stuff redone as 30k imperial stuff.

There may be other rare imperial stuff as well like the pre-old night human empire ships that the Dark Angels and Custodes had, plus some of the unique legion ships and Gloriana battleships.

Of course this means no xenos ships which is a shame. Also no Grey Knights strike cruiser, and probably less of the transports ships range they did and stuff like that.

Really hope whatever way they do it, if heresy or 40k based, that they do a plastic Ramillies class Star Fort

robbienw wrote:
No the chaos associated designs were actually around in the heresy.

If they do it as Battlefleet Heresy i think you'll see all of the Imperial stuff, Chaos stuff and Marine stuff redone as 30k imperial stuff.

There may be other rare imperial stuff as well like the pre-old night human empire ships that the Dark Angels and Custodes had, plus some of the unique legion ships and Gloriana battleships.

Of course this means no xenos ships which is a shame. Also no Grey Knights strike cruiser, and probably less of the transports ships range they did and stuff like that.

Really hope whatever way they do it, if heresy or 40k based, that they do a plastic Ramillies class Star Fort

There is only one thing that needs to be made: The Phalanx.

I will invest in your game if I can have an Imperial Fists BattleMoon.

You set Specialist Games in the Heresy period because you only need 1 set of models, Marines. Paint to taste.

Way less overhead and risk that way.

Interestingly my 40k journey into adopting the eldar as a faction started in BFG.

I really loved the 2nd ed eldar codex and it is IMO still the best eldar codex ever produced from a content perspective and pure range of eldar units. But I never actually had an eldar army in 2nd ed, I'd focused my tiny hobby fund on space wolves.

But BFG eldar corsair ships are IMO the best design of space ship in 40k. Gothic cathedral ships are interesting, but ultimately floating buildings aren't that original..

but the almost piscean design, the delicate lion fish like sails and really sleek shape was just enchanting. The poorer design of the later craftworld ships didn't hold a candle to those original corsair ships.

They also reminded me a way of the Mimbari ships from B5 which was an obsession at the time, so I painted them in a mottled transitional blue-purple inspired by the Mimbari.


IMO the corsair and ork ships were the best aesthetic - they looked like how they worked in the rules in a way that neither the chaos or imperial ships managed.

Without those ships I just won't find a game of whackacathedral that interesting.

 Easy E wrote:
You set Specialist Games in the Heresy period because you only need 1 set of models, Marines. Paint to taste.

Way less overhead and risk that way.

Except they then started Legionnes Imperialis by model-wise releasing the equivalent of what making 2 separate factions in 40k would have been, Marines and Solar Auxilia.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
You set Specialist Games in the Heresy period because you only need 1 set of models, Marines. Paint to taste.

Way less overhead and risk that way.

Except they then started Legionnes Imperialis by model-wise releasing the equivalent of what making 2 separate factions in 40k would have been, Marines and Solar Auxilia.

And lets face it, that was a pleasant surprise.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
You set Specialist Games in the Heresy period because you only need 1 set of models, Marines. Paint to taste.

Way less overhead and risk that way.

Except they then started Legionnes Imperialis by model-wise releasing the equivalent of what making 2 separate factions in 40k would have been, Marines and Solar Auxilia.

But of course the advantage of the HH setting (and the very reason it exists) is not only to allow GW to sell the same models to both players, but to sell any product to virtually any player of that game system.

A marine LI player can bring along some allied Solar Auxilia, and AdMech player can bring some marines. Anyone can grab imperial knight or titan models on a whim and add it to their current army list.

But someone collecting an Eldar BFG 40k fleet has to collect only Eldar ships, they can't casually use a single Ork or Imperial vessel just because they like that model. GW are asking customers to commit to buying a full set of new models if they want to put one cool new mini on the tabletop. Many customers won't do that.

That's why the HH setting is such as safe bet for GW.

IT's also easy to produce, cause less molds needed, easy to distribute, easy to maintain supply. There is no churn with maintaining shelves space in stores. Nothing stay for years in dusty corner because no one want this box of lootas.

 xttz wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
You set Specialist Games in the Heresy period because you only need 1 set of models, Marines. Paint to taste.

Way less overhead and risk that way.

Except they then started Legionnes Imperialis by model-wise releasing the equivalent of what making 2 separate factions in 40k would have been, Marines and Solar Auxilia.

But of course the advantage of the HH setting (and the very reason it exists) is not only to allow GW to sell the same models to both players, but to sell any product to virtually any player of that game system.

A marine LI player can bring along some allied Solar Auxilia, and AdMech player can bring some marines. Anyone can grab imperial knight or titan models on a whim and add it to their current army list.

But someone collecting an Eldar BFG 40k fleet has to collect only Eldar ships, they can't casually use a single Ork or Imperial vessel just because they like that model. GW are asking customers to commit to buying a full set of new models if they want to put one cool new mini on the tabletop. Many customers won't do that.

That's why the HH setting is such as safe bet for GW.

Yet alienating a large proportion of their customer base who don't want imperial circle jerk for the 4th game system in the row isn't a huge winner either.

Edit: I'd hasten to add that all that logic you list applies to setting it in 40k as well, the only difference is theres less of an excuse for chaos ships being imperial but painted different.

Dudeface wrote:

Yet alienating a large proportion of their customer base who don't want imperial circle jerk for the 4th game system in the row isn't a huge winner either.

why? What else gonna people do, take their community and play Dropfleet or Firestorm Armada instead
Worst thing happening for GW is that those people keep playing GW games with OOP models they print.

As long as the majority stays within the GW bubble they lose nothing

Speculation? I may have mentioned it earlier in the thread.

Only GW knows GW’s exact sales figures. And I think it’s safe to say the Venn Diagram of 30k and 40K players isn’t a single circle. There’ll be reasonable numbers just doing one or the other.

So, whilst we can be reasonably confident without precise data that there are two markets there? My pure speculation is that the sales figures only GW has access to point to Heresy players being the most open to Epic scale and BFG, with 40K players being more inclined to same scale of model, different scale of battle supporting games.

Further baseless speculation? Heresy does seem to attract an older crowd. And so they’re possibly more likely to have played the older versions of Epic and BFG, and have the pockets to play multiple systems.

I’d love to have something of actual substance to present here. But I don’t. So please only treat this as not completely demented speculation.

Yeah GW know exactly how well each of their game systems have performed previously.

They know how well HH Titanicus sold versus 40K Aeronautica, and more importantly they know which specific model ranges & kits performed well. If - for example - they saw Imperial aircraft selling at several times the volume or Eldar or Tau aircraft, that's definitely going to be a factor in later project decisions.

In contrast, we really only have vibes to decide how well each approach would perform.

 kodos wrote:

Dudeface wrote:

Yet alienating a large proportion of their customer base who don't want imperial circle jerk for the 4th game system in the row isn't a huge winner either.

why? What else gonna people do, take their community and play Dropfleet or Firestorm Armada instead
Worst thing happening for GW is that those people keep playing GW games with OOP models they print.

As long as the majority stays within the GW bubble they lose nothing

What else am I going to do? Not buy BFG and watch it quietly whimper out in a corner probably. They're investing time and effort into a product. I trust they know what they're doing based on their sales metrics and whatnot, but at the end of the day make it HH and you remove the chance of the rest of their settings appear. Market it for 40k with the same launch factions and you can still re-enact "historical" battles for the heresy or whatever you want between imperium and chaos, but you can add more stuff in if it does well and drum up more interest. Locking it to HH simply makes a large chunk of people who aren't in the "space battles" interest circle turn away.

I think the point may be that heresy contingent are people who knew setting and gonna buy that BFH. Instead in 40k we have lots of Titus generation players who don't give a gak about space battles

 kabaakaba wrote:
I think the point may be that heresy contingent are people who knew setting and gonna buy that BFH. Instead in 40k we have lots of Titus generation players who don't give a gak about space battles

It doesn't matter largely, that's some random grognard gatekeeping effect though.

Surely you want to try and snag more of the new players?

Speculation on my part:

I don't think it's to do exactly with sales, but the SDS is the studio that's interested in a spaceship game (and earlier, the epic scale game), however as SDS rather than mainstudio, they are not granted access to the main 40k IP in recent years so I think the management forced their hand into HH or nothing, which is a shame.

I can see how quite a few people who want to play BFG or Epic would lose interest if the game is set in 30k.

I really can't see anyone who wants to play BFG or Epic losing interest because the game is set in 40k.

 Ohman wrote:
I can see how quite a few people who want to play BFG or Epic would lose interest if the game is set in 30k.

I really can't see anyone who wants to play BFG or Epic losing interest because the game is set in 40k.

Well said.

Daba wrote:Speculation on my part:

I don't think it's to do exactly with sales, but the SDS is the studio that's interested in a spaceship game (and earlier, the epic scale game), however as SDS rather than mainstudio, they are not granted access to the main 40k IP in recent years so I think the management forced their hand into HH or nothing, which is a shame.

Feels like there could be some truth to this

Ohman wrote:I can see how quite a few people who want to play BFG or Epic would lose interest if the game is set in 30k.

I really can't see anyone who wants to play BFG or Epic losing interest because the game is set in 40k.

And this is where I'm sat, I can't understand any logical justification for HH as a setting for it.

 Daba wrote:
Speculation on my part:

I don't think it's to do exactly with sales, but the SDS is the studio that's interested in a spaceship game (and earlier, the epic scale game), however as SDS rather than mainstudio, they are not granted access to the main 40k IP in recent years so I think the management forced their hand into HH or nothing, which is a shame.

SDS did both Aeronautica and Necromunda set in the 40k universe. Most notably Necromunda did their own take on Genestealers last year.

They're allowed to use the 40k IP providing the models don't overlap with the main studio ranges. However often it's just easier / more economical to focus on HH.

 xttz wrote:

 Daba wrote:
Speculation on my part:

I don't think it's to do exactly with sales, but the SDS is the studio that's interested in a spaceship game (and earlier, the epic scale game), however as SDS rather than mainstudio, they are not granted access to the main 40k IP in recent years so I think the management forced their hand into HH or nothing, which is a shame.

SDS did both Aeronautica and Necromunda set in the 40k universe. Most notably Necromunda did their own take on Genestealers last year.

They're allowed to use the 40k IP providing the models don't overlap with the main studio ranges. However often it's just easier / more economical to focus on HH.

I just don't get it. I can sort of see it with LI if you squint enough, they're trying to milk more from the CAD process for plasticisation of the HH range, so making same but smaller allows a bit of a double dip. There is no benefit to it for BFG though.

The only thing stopping them putting both HH and 40k branding on relevant Imperial and Chaos product boxes is whatever internecine internal warfare exists between the different wings of the organisation.

 xttz wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
You set Specialist Games in the Heresy period because you only need 1 set of models, Marines. Paint to taste.

Way less overhead and risk that way.

Except they then started Legionnes Imperialis by model-wise releasing the equivalent of what making 2 separate factions in 40k would have been, Marines and Solar Auxilia.

But of course the advantage of the HH setting (and the very reason it exists) is not only to allow GW to sell the same models to both players, but to sell any product to virtually any player of that game system.

A marine LI player can bring along some allied Solar Auxilia, and AdMech player can bring some marines. Anyone can grab imperial knight or titan models on a whim and add it to their current army list.

But someone collecting an Eldar BFG 40k fleet has to collect only Eldar ships, they can't casually use a single Ork or Imperial vessel just because they like that model. GW are asking customers to commit to buying a full set of new models if they want to put one cool new mini on the tabletop. Many customers won't do that.

That's why the HH setting is such as safe bet for GW.

And then we have the Dark Mechanicum, who don't fit with that idea at all.

Acting like distinct factions are a bad thing just seems odd. Yeah, percentage wise more of the playerbase can technically use more of the units...but it being composed of identical factions and locked to the Horus Heresy without the variety of 40k is something that will limit who the game appeals to from the start anyway, so it's a bigger percentage of a smaller amount. Someone who wants to play Eldar or Orks just isn't going to play. It's not as if BFG wouldn't be able to have some overlap with several factions though, in pretty much the same way the Horus Heresy does even.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 xttz wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 Easy E wrote:
You set Specialist Games in the Heresy period because you only need 1 set of models, Marines. Paint to taste.

Way less overhead and risk that way.

Except they then started Legionnes Imperialis by model-wise releasing the equivalent of what making 2 separate factions in 40k would have been, Marines and Solar Auxilia.

But of course the advantage of the HH setting (and the very reason it exists) is not only to allow GW to sell the same models to both players, but to sell any product to virtually any player of that game system.

A marine LI player can bring along some allied Solar Auxilia, and AdMech player can bring some marines. Anyone can grab imperial knight or titan models on a whim and add it to their current army list.

But someone collecting an Eldar BFG 40k fleet has to collect only Eldar ships, they can't casually use a single Ork or Imperial vessel just because they like that model. GW are asking customers to commit to buying a full set of new models if they want to put one cool new mini on the tabletop. Many customers won't do that.

That's why the HH setting is such as safe bet for GW.

And then we have the Dark Mechanicum, who don't fit with that idea at all.

Acting like distinct factions are a bad thing just seems odd. Yeah, percentage wise more of the playerbase can technically use more of the units...but it being composed of identical factions and locked to the Horus Heresy without the variety of 40k is something that will limit who the game appeals to from the start anyway, so it's a bigger percentage of a smaller amount. Someone who wants to play Eldar or Orks just isn't going to play. It's not as if BFG wouldn't be able to have some overlap with several factions though, in pretty much the same way the Horus Heresy does even.

Even then if they really wanted to only make 2 factions at launch: chaos ships and imperial navy. Boom, completely time period agnostic. Quickly add in loyalist marine ships and you've still covered both systems without the limitation. The only other factor I can think of is the volume of ship battle fluff and padding for the books they can regurgitate from HH might be higher.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:


And then we have the Dark Mechanicum, who don't fit with that idea at all.

Of course they do. LI gives explicit permission to slap a 'loyalist' or 'traitor' label on as many kits as it can, for example:
"though certain Legions sided with the Emperor or the Warmaster, it was not unknown for disparate elements to go against the will of their Primarch and choose a different path during the Horus Heresy"

AT did this too. The only effective restriction LI currently has that you can't put Dark Mech in the same list as a Psi-titan (a resin upgrade kit released for AT). Perhaps they'll add custodes or daemons in future, but the vast majority of LI kits can be mixed & matched at will. You can have traitor Ultramarines running with Dark Mech, or loyalist Death Guard with a psi-titan.

While there are some exceptions the system is designed to be as flexible as possible to collectors, and nothing like competing 40k model ranges. My original point stands.

This is getting off topic, so I'll keep it short. In the FAQ and Errata for Adeptus Titanicus...

Dark Mechanicum Stalker Banners can only be included in a Battlegroup with the Traitor Allegiance.

 xttz wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:


And then we have the Dark Mechanicum, who don't fit with that idea at all.

Of course they do. LI gives explicit permission to slap a 'loyalist' or 'traitor' label on as many kits as it can, for example:
"though certain Legions sided with the Emperor or the Warmaster, it was not unknown for disparate elements to go against the will of their Primarch and choose a different path during the Horus Heresy"

AT did this too. The only effective restriction LI currently has that you can't put Dark Mech in the same list as a Psi-titan (a resin upgrade kit released for AT). Perhaps they'll add custodes or daemons in future, but the vast majority of LI kits can be mixed & matched at will. You can have traitor Ultramarines running with Dark Mech, or loyalist Death Guard with a psi-titan.

While there are some exceptions the system is designed to be as flexible as possible to collectors, and nothing like competing 40k model ranges. My original point stands.

Them being able to sell to a sub-set of a smaller player base being an inherently good thing because they know you can have a visually bland game of mirror matches is a really weird take, just saying.

I'm not passing judgement or trying to claim this as being good or bad. What I'm doing is laying out the logic GW beancounters will be using to sign off on projects that require 6-7 figures of capital investment. The point is that you don't need to sell anyone here on how good 40k BFG would be, it's the beancounters you need to convince.

Personally I'd love to see Epic 40k again, but I'm not getting my hopes up for it happening in the near future with the very clear way that GW develop & produce models in the current decade.

 xttz wrote:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:


And then we have the Dark Mechanicum, who don't fit with that idea at all.

Of course they do. LI gives explicit permission to slap a 'loyalist' or 'traitor' label on as many kits as it can, for example:
"though certain Legions sided with the Emperor or the Warmaster, it was not unknown for disparate elements to go against the will of their Primarch and choose a different path during the Horus Heresy"

AT did this too. The only effective restriction LI currently has that you can't put Dark Mech in the same list as a Psi-titan (a resin upgrade kit released for AT). Perhaps they'll add custodes or daemons in future, but the vast majority of LI kits can be mixed & matched at will. You can have traitor Ultramarines running with Dark Mech, or loyalist Death Guard with a psi-titan.

While there are some exceptions the system is designed to be as flexible as possible to collectors, and nothing like competing 40k model ranges. My original point stands.

Your original point does not still stand because your point was that any product can be sold to and used by any player, that there are kits that can only be used by a specific faction means that actually isn't the case. Someone collecting Loyalist Space Marines can't just casually use a Dark Mechanicum Seperos construct, and no doubt whatever else they later add for them. It's the very same thing you said was bad about BFG with Eldar or Ork ships being limited to certain players.

 xttz wrote:
I'm not passing judgement or trying to claim this as being good or bad. What I'm doing is laying out the logic GW beancounters will be using to sign off on projects that require 6-7 figures of capital investment. The point is that you don't need to sell anyone here on how good 40k BFG would be, it's the beancounters you need to convince.

Personally I'd love to see Epic 40k again, but I'm not getting my hopes up for it happening in the near future with the very clear way that GW develop & produce models in the current decade.

I think then the real issue is that it's obvious to us, the paying consumer base, what would be well received and seemingly, they are not aware.