Harry and Hastings Chime in on the Future of Warhammer

[Bigred]

Now here is one of the most interesting exchanges I've read in a long time regarding the state of Warhammer Fantasy and its future. Al from a couple of old stalwarts and pillars of the community, Harry and 79Hastings69 via Warseer: (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?372124-Release-schedule-rumours-2-0/page24)

The thing to take away from conversations such as this aren't the details, but the tone. These are some of the most dyed in the wool followers (and folks in the know) and enthusiasts of the game having a conversation about their favorite and cherished game. But the tone is more one of family members paying a bedside farewell to a dying loved one...

See if you pick up on that.

Harry

I have faith in the future... and I will try to tell you why.
I love Warhammer ... I have loved it since 1st Edition and I have loved it through each edition. I have no doubt I will continue to love it in 9th Edition and beyond ... and I will tell you why.
None of these editions have been perfect ... 1st Edition certainly wasn't ... what I fell in love with was the endevour. To try and produce a Mass Combat fantasy game. Games developers have spent the next three decades trying to make it better ... trying to produce the BEST mass combat fantasy game they can ... and whilst we could argue the toss all day about which edition was best and why ... the fact is ... they were all great ... none were perfect, each had strengths and weaknesses but at any given point in time you could probably argue that Warhammer was the best mass combat fantasy wargame out there. Why? Because there were folks who loved the game as much as I did with that endevour.

With each edition, with each army book, with Warhammer Fantasy Role-Playing Game, with each Black Libary novel, with each special character, with each new miniature release the background has got richer and deeper until it has become an unmatched fantasy setting in which to build armies and fight mass fantasy battles. Why? Because there were folks that loved the game as much as do writing all this stuff and making the miniatures.

None of this has changed. There are still a bunch of folks at Games Workshop, folks in the studio, games developers who love the game as much as I do. There is still the same endevour ... to write and produce the BEST mass combat fantasy wargame out there.
Will it have strengths and weaknesses? ... Yes ... just like every other edition. Will it still be the best game out there? ... Yes ... because nothing can take all of that rich background away...all they can do is add to it.

At the end of the day ...
If you don't like the rules ... you can play any edition you liked.
If you don't like the changes to the timeline you can set your battles in any period of warhammer history you like.
If you don't like mixed armies you can pick your army from one race.
If you want to mix armies and develop the narrative to explain it ... you can.
Whatever you choose Warhammer will probably be the best mass combat fantasy wargame out there.
I imagine I will enjoy getting my head around 9th edition, building armies for 9th edition and playing games just as much as I have for every other edition.

Oh .. yes ... BRING IT ON!

Lord Solar Plexus

There are some popular misconceptions here. A new edition is not good or welcome because at the end of the day you can opt not to play it. The assumption that one can just play any edition he likes is also mostly a platitude. Perhaps, if you're playing alone. Otherwise you need to convince at least one other person to play an unsupported game. If you want to play against certain established army builds instead of a blend, you cannot just decide to. Therefore, all these supposed options are more or less a sham.
...
1. A new edition is not good because one can play something else: 4th D&D is not good because people play 3.5.
2. You cannot just play any edition you like unless you convince at least one person: With D&D 3.5, that condition was fulfilled - for some. With all other editions of D&D, it was not but people keep suggesting to those who prefer 4th to "just" play it as if nothing happened. With almost all editions of WF, all systems, it is not common either. Yes, there is the Eastern Fringe, but nobody here would find the strength or time to play 2nd ed. 40k on a regular basis. There's a strong pull to move along with the majority and not "just" do what you want.
3. If the new One Rulebook allows an alliance I do not like, say, a HPA/Great Cannon/Ironblasters with WoC, I cannot possibly simply chose not to play it when the majority of opponents takes it and sees no issue with it. I can make up my mind for my own army, not for someone else's, and I'm not going to coerce people into some kind of comp even if I was able to. That's bad style.
...
If you only have one buddy, and he wants to play the new edition and you want to play the old, then that's highly problematic and not solved by "shrug, just play what you want". The suggestion implies everyone's going to "just" follow your or my lead. If you go to tournaments, tough luck. If you're in a group of 3-4 and only one quits because he doesn't like the mishmash, that's already a huge loss.



79Hastings69

I agree too to an extent. The game however should have fun at its very core, mixed list would be fun for friendly play, but without very strict rules tournament play could see some very imbalanced lists/builds (I know people who'd excel at making such lists).

I guess it's going to come down to how it (mixed armies) is managed, the biggest part of me thinks quite loosely so that GW have a wider market to push WFB kits on to.

I have to say Harry's post is very upbeat, myself I simply see it as a way for GW to sell more stuff (I'm not saying that's a bad thing it's a business after all), my feeling sadly toward GW are that if they are prepared to sell something like finecrap to customers just in the name of £ then I no longer believe that they have their customers opinions in mind at all so anything could happen.

If I were still interested in WFB I think I'd enjoy making a narrative driven force that could be used on the tabletop but as competitive play doesn't interest me I'm only looking from one side.

Many moons ago I started a mousillon themed vc army, some rules were transferable some weren't, I think a less rigid army building list could make such themed armies more popular and fun to field.

I think the points made in LSPs last post are very valid.

Harry

You know me ... hope for the best ... prepare for the worst.

Here's the thing. you are talking about GW as a company.
Games Workshop as a company is not re-writing warhammer. Individuals are.
Individuals who have who's focus is writing the best rules they can. Individuals who love and care about this game as much as I do.
Sure there may be the odd bit of pressure to choose options that encourage sales ... but like any design Brief ... good designers ... (in this case games designers) are not restricted by a design brief ... they exceed all expectations whilst meeting the brief to the point that the original brief seems to have little relevance to the final design.
Also you don't know what else is in a brief. Can't imagine Alan Merrett not suggesting they bugger about with the IP at their peril for example.
Also it pre-supposes that the folks making the final decisions are even shoving their oar in that much at this stage. They may ave given the games developers a blank piece of paper and said 'have at it'. If you were starting from scratch what would you do. They may be waiting to see what they come back with before asking the question 'if we changed this would we sell more minis'.

I honestly think everyone involved in this right now will be doing so with the best of intentions and the highest aspirations for the best ever Warhammer.
After all that is what is ultimately going to see the most new editions and thus the most fantasy miniatures going forward.
It would take a complete @rse to think some short sighted, ham fisted, rules created to sell minis were going to be a good idea over and above this aim.

My hope for the future is based on common sense rather than blind optimism.

Having said that common sense has been in short supply at times.

This entire conversation stems from the rumor curculaitng by those in the know regarding WFB 9th:

Harry:
.... significant changes to the rules, the timeline and the approach to armybooks.

In particular the rumors that 9th could see a "full reboot" that invalidates all existing Army Books, and then the entire range of 15+ WFB army books gets shrunk down to a handful (say about 4) "Compendiums" that group similar armies.

This would have the business effect of shrinking WFB's overall footprint and freeing up Games Workshop development resources, allowing the entire cycle of WFB army compendiums to be updated on a shorter timescale.

Warseer's Earlybird 6-27-2013


V9 Army books :

Ancient Kingdoms : Lizardmen/High Elves/Wood Elves/Dwarves/Tomb Kings
Servants of Dark Gods : Warriors of Chaos/Daemons of Chaos/Beastmen/Skaven/Dark Elves
Old Word Denizens : The Empire/Bretonnia/Orcs and Goblins/Ogre Kingdoms/Vampire Counts

[Denzark]

Respectfully, I think 'bedside fairwell to a dying loved one' is a trifle histrionic interpretation of this.

[Bigred]

Oh, I don't think WFB is going anywhere,

But the trepidation over a massive edition reboot to consolidate the game is unmistakable.

8th could well be the last "full - grand" edition of the game.

[Denzark]

Could you elaborate on what you mean by 'grand' edition? After all, they haven't got rid of LoTR rubbish yet, and we know what happens to specialist games, so can't see WFB in a 'lesser' form.

[Wildeybeast]

This entire conversation stems from the rumor curculaitng by those in the know regarding WFB 9th:

Harry:

In particular the rumors that 9th could see a "full reboot" that invalidates all existing Army Books, and then the entire range of 15+ WFB army books gets shrunk down to a handful (say about 4) "Compendiums" that group similar armies.

This would have the business effect of shrinking WFB's overall footprint and freeing up Games Workshop development resources, allowing the entire cycle of WFB army compendiums to be updated on a shorter timescale.

I can't see this ever happening. It would cost them money, not make more. I can see a rules overhaul so big it requires a Ravening Hordes style booklet, but not merging army books. If it does, that's they day my armies go in the bin.

[Lexington]

A big shake-up like this is long overdue, rules-wise. I'd have more fears for Fantasy's background, given the recent involvement of certain developers, but that world's been stagnantly crappy for so long that I can't imagine it getting worse. Definitely curious to see what happens.

[BoW Ben]

I'm just glad to see they are still thinking about Warhammer Fantasy. The idea of Compendiums over Army Books is certainly an interesting one and you could group together a few of the factions quite easily for different source books. Bit like The Hobbit/LotR at the moment I guess.

I really like 8th edition and have had a lot more fun with it than the new 40k but I do agree that the fluff needs a massive push. It has been doing practically nothing for years and they even backpedaled on a lot of stuff.

[harveydent]

it seems plausible that they might create a 9th edition that is a quick-and-easy version of the game. all rulebooks rolled together into one or two volumes, with emphasis placed on basic units for the sake of having a 'learning edition' focusing on modeling and painting. i mean, the guy actually says 'you can play whatever edition you want,' and that leads me to believe that they're ok with two versions of the game being in circulation simultaneously. that's essentially what we have already in 40k - a tournament version and a non-tournament version. they do the same thing with Magic the Gathering. they have a constructed format and a limited, learner's format (draft). the limited format was originally begun so that players could simulate the 'beginner's experience,' but it ended up becoming this massive, mainstream competitive format.

[Mr Mystery]

I'm still far from convinced about the supposed big shake up.


Game works fine as is, and is getting a good amount of attention. From a sales perspective, ditching army books just doesn't seem to make sense. Why sell four books, when you could sell one for each army. Allows a longer development period for each army as well.

Colour me confused.

[Bitrider]

I'm still far from convinced about the supposed big shake up.


Game works fine as is, and is getting a good amount of attention. From a sales perspective, ditching army books just doesn't seem to make sense. Why sell four books, when you could sell one for each army. Allows a longer development period for each army as well.

Colour me confused.

..and done. :D You are welcome.

[Coyote81]

I think I would be fine with a compendium for different groups of armies, even if they can work together as well. (As long as it's group with some sense the timeline/story). I think they need to do something to increase the rate at which books are updated/faq'd so that they don't lose players that love their armies due to the armies suddenly becoming bad. (Terrible or unplayable depending on who you ask) I've played the game since 5th ed and I've see all kind of good changes, but some armies always suffer the last army syndrome. By the time they get a book, they are good for about a month then the news of the newest edition comes out and they change the rules slightly (or a lot) and that army that so many people have been waiting on, falls on it's face after only a month.

Having been a long time WE player, as well as Beast of Chaos/Daemons of Chaos (Yes I listed them that way because I was rather irked when all of my daemons models were unplayable because I didn't have enough for a stand alone army), O&G, Vampire Counts, and recently dabbling in Empire. I've seen many of these armies get tons and tons of updates, new models, love in general from GW. The the former two armies, get trounced in the mud. I hope a change to a compendium system where they could reasonably update some 4 book to cover all the armies would fix their issues I've seen develope of the years.

p.s. Have you seen how many models in the WE line are still metal? Core Metal spearmen...........sigh.

[Wildeybeast]

A book every other month seems like a good turnover rate to me. I agree that some books like WE are neglected, but that is due to the way the 'meta' of the current rules works, combined with the way they write the books. Rather than say 'Jervis you take Brets, Ward you take Lizards' and so on, people volunteer taking on a book when they have a good idea of how to freshen it up. People will obviously struggle to come up with ideas of how you make a shooty, skirmishy army like WE competitive in the 'big infantry blocks' culture of 8th without changing the style of the army. As a fellow WE player, I would rather wait and get a proper update than one that completely changes the way the army plays simply for the sake of getting the book out according to a schedule. Moving to compendiums wouldn't make it any easier to keep the unique flavour of each army, in fact it would make it harder. Furthermore, it won't increase the release rate of books as you will have to wait until all the models for four different armies are ready.

[Learn2Eel]

I agree that if an author feels they can do justice to an army, let them take their time to do it rather than conform to a schedule. Though the recent releases have been clustered, the significant gap between the release of Necrons to Chaos Space Marines and Empire to Warriors of Chaos tickles me enough to think that they have taken a lot of time to do this stuff and merely had it all lying around waiting for an appropriate release date. Hence why Chaos Marines released alongside the first Horus Heresy book, and High Elves being followed by Eldar.

[eldargal]

The thing that worries me is that Hastings implied you might be able to pick and mix units from any army book in your army, with HE swordmasters alongside Lizardmen. The great thing about WFB is that each faction has its own unique aesthetic and playstyle, if that gets diluted by allowing people to take pick and mix armies then it will cease to be the game I love. If it is just a more involved Allies system it won't be so bad. I'm not going to pre-judge anything but this does worry me.

[Wildeybeast]

That would worry me too. Most likely we will get something like the 40K allies system and all this has been misinterpreted/blown out of proportion.

[Brakkart]

The only armies that I could see working in a compendium with a pick n mix arrangement would be the various chaos forces, which would be a return to how they used to be all in one big army book (which used to come in a box in at least 1 edition). given that all the various novels and such featuring the Chaos forces speak of hordes of men, beastmen, monsters and daemons all together I've never been much of a fan of them having separate army books. I think they are much better as one vast horde with lots of options for every section of the army, similar to how Orcs & Goblins are.

I don't think any of the other armies would work like that though, they are all too different and frankly that is one of Warhammer's greatest strengths.

[Chronowraith]

These rumors worry me as well. I really don't see how compendiums would work well. Even if every army was separate and distinct from the others within the same compendium the world would lose a great amount of detail and fluff. It would cease being a game setting and become simply a game unless you have the older books.

As for what Eldargal stated with compendiums of units that would allow different factions marching side-by side within the compendiums that worries me even more. If the game balance was off at all you'd end up with 4 cookie cutter armies. I couldn't imagine that helping game sales if suddenly people go from buying the power units of each race to the power units of 4 compendiums. Allies similar to the 40k table would be tricky enough as many factions simply don't work well with others. Tomb Kings? Skaven? Wood Elves? They are either isolationists or simply untrustworthy and it would kill me to see rank-and-file Skeletons being led by a Wood Elf spellweaver with a doomwheel rolling around the backfield.

Overall, regardless of the source of the rumors, I'll believe it when I see it in regards to this. 9th edition is still a ways off but GW certainly needs to control the rumors otherwise it might impact sales for 8th edition. Who wants to buy a new armybook they know will be invalidated in a year? Personally, I think GW should be more transparent about these massive changes. It may hurt their bottom line but I'd be much more willing to accept a massive reboot that replaces everything with these rumored compendiums if GW explained up front what would is happening.

One last note... I really don't get a negative tone from the conversation originally posted by Big Red. Hastings has been negative about GW for quite a while now so that shouldn't be any surprise. It sounds like both individuals are having a very valid discussion on the topic of the health of Warhammer Fantasy but it doesn't seem like this is fueled by any insider knowledge. Hasting's points about GW are some of the same ones we see from posters here on BoLS while Harry remains very optimistic.

[TheCastigator]

I honestly have a hard time believing that they would go back to compendium books, given that they've taken three or four editions to work out the kinks from separating them in the first place. Why would the split hordes of chaos and undead just to jam them back together again, not to mention all the work to differentiate the elf armies. I would buy that they are going to to do allies, which concerns me as well. It's not so easy in fantasy, since all the armies play fairly differently, whereas in 40k you have a full third of the game (and 80+% of players) being marines, which despite their differences all die to roughly the same strategies.

Despite the obvious neglect to some armies, 8th edition is excellent, not perfect, but very well done, and while some of the books are not as competitive, they all have viable builds, pretty good options, and relatively good balance. GW for the first time in a loooooong time has managed to avoid the horrific codex creep that has plagued their games for ages. Eight books in and only a handful of items are bad, I'll take that any day of the week. I would hope that they leave 8th in tact for a couple more years before pushing 9th, but that is just me. I realize they need to make money.

While I know it will never happen, I would like to see actual numbers for fantasy, instead of all this doom and gloom anecdotal nonsense. Everyone's store is either no one plays fantasy or everyone is jumping on the band wagon. Are the sales numbers as dismal as people claim? I have a hard time believing it's so dire they would risk alienating their player base by scrapping the game in it's current form. I think the rules need a bit of tweaking, but in no way do they need a major overhaul. If the numbers are so bad, why would they accelerate the release schedule, as that could end up costing them more money. And yes, more transparency would be helpful from GW in this case.

If they are pushing for 9th next year, fine, I will no doubt play it. But all of this talk seems to be pure conjecture without any real substantive base. All the claims are vague enough to go either way without making the proprietors come off as idiots. Per the usual, I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

[Bigred]

I think they have to do something about the fundamental issue with WFB at this time in the overall wargaming space - its enormous barrier to entry.

No other game out there demands you pay so much, assemble so many miniatures, paint them all up, then face a steep learning curve with the rules before you are up and feeling like a competent player.

Ten years ago, GW could get away with it, but imagine a new gamer wanting to get into the hobby walking into a store with several hundred dollars.

You get the rundown of what it takes to start up:
Warhammer 40,000
Warhammer Fantasy
Warmachine
Infinity
X-Wing
Flames of War
DUST Warfare

I would imagine that WFB is having real problems not with the existing playerbase, but with enticing new players to join the hobby.

The game desperately needs a "smaller scale" version so folks can enter and get up and playing faster. Army book consolidation makes sense from the perspective of manpower resources. If you make triple the revenue from 40k as WFB, how can you justify to the board spending equal development resources on both systems. Now you can't drop any armies, and GW's primary goal is the production and selling of miniatures. So you shrink the development resources by decreasing the product size of the 15+ army books WFB currently demands. Ta-da.

Off the top of my head I could easily see something like:
Forces of Order: Empire, Bret, Dwarves, High Elves, Wood Elves
Forces of Chaos: Daemons, Warriors, Beastmen
Ravening Hordes: Orks, Ogres, Skaven, Lizardmen
Forces of Darkness VC, Khemri, Dark Elves

But yeah, the allies - mixing and matching would be the challenge to balance out.

[Chronowraith]

I disagree with the entry barrier, at least in relation to other games. The cost isn't any more than Warhammer 40,000 from my experience. Costing up my Skaven army without including any E-bay deals, battalion boxes, IoB sets, or other discounts comes to 606 dollars for 2400 points. That's for an army that consists of almost 300 models and is fully competitive. For my semi-competitive Space Marine army I'm looking at 652 dollars for 1850 points and roughly 50ish models (again with no discounts). Both are roughly even in cost.

I agree wholeheartedly that there are more models to assemble and paint and that could very well be seen as a daunting task to anyone entering the hobby. I know that when I started up my Skaven again in 2009 it took me almost 4 years to have a suitable army painted up and I've been in the hobby since 1992.

Rules-wise I find the streamlined 8th edition rules far easier to keep track of and understand than the 6th edition ruleset for 40k. Monsters operate similarly to monstrous creatures which operate similarly to infantry. Essentially everything boils down to infantry and cavalry with a few different small variations. In 40k their are big differences between jump infantry and infantry, vehicles, flyers, etc. I will not say that 8th edition is a perfect ruleset, but short of actually playing a few games, it is a pretty simple system to figure out.

I think Fantasy has a problem attracting new players simply due to popular culture. Sci-Fi is simply far more popular and predominant in today's modern culture. Short of the Hobbit and Lord of the Rings, when was the last time a good Fantasy movie was at the theaters? Narnia? Harry Potter? Even the fantasy movies that do come out are often grounded in the modern world (such as Harry Potter, Dresden Files, etc). Sci-Fi on the other hand has a number of high budget films EVERY year. TV shows focus on Sci-Fi too and most of the celebrated Sci-Fi/Fantasy authors you see at bookstores are... you guessed it.. sci-fi.

As for the compendiums the Forces of Chaos and the Forces of Order you mentioned make some sense (minus wood elves since they are too insular to be considered anyone's allies on a persistent basis). However I don't see the other ones. Lizardmen wouldn't be caught dead working with Skaven (who have destroyed a number of their cities). I think it's more likely to see Khorne become the chaos god of pink fluffy bunnies before you ever see VC and TK working together. So unless those are convenient groupings based on theme, I really don't see it.

[TheCastigator]

I do think there is something to the barrier to entry argument, but it really depends on the army in question more than anything. Starting Empire of Vampires from scratch is going to cost more than Ogres or Warriors just based on the number of models you need. That being said, the internet is the great price equalizer.

The other thing is that fantasy does work as a skirmish game. And while a supplement to do something like that could be very nice and complimentary, playing fantasy at any level between 1000-2000 works. Generally speaking, percentages make it very good at lower points levels. The only thing that really changes as you move up is magic gets bigger/crazier.

I just think it's funny given that everything GW has done to increase the size of games through points reductions and supplements like storm of magic and we are talking about the need to make a skirmish game.

In terms of compendiums if you swapped lizards with wood elves in Order, swapped Skaven with Khemri in darkness, and put wood elves with ogres, khemri and maybe O&G in a nonaligned forces book it could work while largely respecting the fluff. But that still fails to address the balance issues that would obviously crop up from allowing elves to take empire artillery or vampire lords teaming up with just about anything else.

There is definitely something to the pop culture argument, but I think that game of thrones can be used as a guide post for where fantasy as a genre needs to go to be successful.

[eldargal]

Actually you can put together a 1500-2000 point Empire army for a couple of hundred pounds thanks to battalions and plastic characters. I don't really buy the entry barrier argument. VC isn't much worse. Some 40k armies (eldar for one) are much more expensive because of a reliance on metal/Finecast. Some WFB armies have the same issue. I don't think there is that much of a gulf between them.

Not sure what you mean about Game of Thrones, the last thing any established wargame should do is ape successful, radically different books/tv series' to try and get attention. They will just alienate the existing playerbase and probably fail to get new players anyway.

Also when it comes to how WFB is selling it is worth noting that according to a survey of US retailers WFB has been moving up in their sales. A few years ago it wan't ont the list (top 7) now it is fourth. WFB has always been less popular in the US, too. I think this rumoured revamp is much more about 'how can we make WFB into a big seller like 40k' not 'how can we save WFB?'.

[TheCastigator]

That's good to hear about sales. I know that is has always been less of a seller than 40K, but good to know it's making a climb. I actually meant to delete the GoT comment, but having said it, I think that it is a good demonstration that fantasy as a genre remains pretty strong, despite it's second fiddle statues to sci-fi. I would hope that GW would not decide to ape it, but it could be a good source of inspiration of how to fix Brets. Big lord calls banner men, each has a different style, arsenal, mounted and foot units, etc.

I think the cost issue is relative, as obviously it will depend on each persons financial situation. My 2500 vampire list ran me about $570 buying from discounted online retailers (there is not a store where I currently live). But the point is taken.

[lattd]

GOT works great on the hobbit rules, as I have found out whilst working on a GOT supplement. I would be very sad to see a complete rehash of warhammer.

[Bigred]

Eldargal said:

Also when it comes to how WFB is selling it is worth noting that according to a survey of US retailers WFB has been moving up in their sales. A few years ago it wan't ont the list (top 7) now it is fourth. WFB has always been less popular in the US, too. I think this rumoured revamp is much more about 'how can we make WFB into a big seller like 40k' not 'how can we save WFB?'.

I'm thinking its probably less about entry cost, but more about "time till playable" - if that makes sense. It still the game that requires the highest number of models to assemble, and paint before you get a good feel for what the game feels like.

For example, you can paint up probably as few as 30 models and get a feel for what a 40K game really feels like with say Space Marines. You take a couple tanks, commanders, and 2-3 small units.

But to get that level of 4-5 units for WFB (even small units), the modelcount is much higher. Ogres address this somewhat and I applaud GW for sticking with the all large-based army concept.

But the flipside of this argument is sheer economics. Pretend you run GW. In general the highest expense most manufacturers run is their manpower. Humans are expensive and only get more expensive. Now you own 2 wargame systems each of which have similar ranges in size, and about 15 army books that need updating, expansion, distribution, etc...

When both systems make the same revenue, its fine.

Now lets say that one system makes double the other. So you know that every hour you tell Phil Kelly (and all the other employees) to write and work on system A, your company makes twice what it will make for that same hour of work on system B. You can't just drop system B as you need the revenue and in total it is still a large chunk of cash. But you know you have to do something. Because at some point the board is going to say - what the heck are you doing - focus on what brings the shareholders revenue most efficiently.

So what do you do? What is the best solution to continue to support the smaller gamesystem, not alienate its fans, but acknowledge that system A is where you need to be focusing your resources?

Now lets say that those ratios are more than 2 to 1, and getting worse over time...

[Denzark]

That makes sense BR. But i have always thought of WFB is where 40K gamers go when they grow up. They still want the GW package in terms of models, scenery, etc, but want soemthing different. Like sitting there going 'my fifth landraider is cool, but I want to paint something different, and my heart is telling me BFO dragon is what will hit the spot.

I haven't based this on evidence, beyond seeing dedicated WFB players in the clubs I have randomly frequented, are older than the average 40K. Dedicated i mean by having whole painted armies. But if you'll put up with GW warts and all at that age, you must be dedicated.

So GW think - I can't keep that junkie hooked on 40K at that age - so I will make WFB his gaming retirement home (before he discovers ancients/historicals.) Now and again there will be collateral damage, when the junkie sees online or instore, a new 40K army and thinks 'I never sold my old tau - 1 or 2 units and I might be competitive again'.

So I hear what you say about effort to reward ratio for GW in terms of their production/profit but I think there are other factors about WFB that wiegh in and skew your figures. Also the fact that designers are probably doing stuff off clock at home and write on races they are into - they are self interested to not let their WFB work they do for love, interrupt with the cold hard cash cow of 40K...

Just some random musings, hey?

[eldargal]

Now lets say that those ratios are more than 2 to 1, and getting worse over time...

But that's the thing, as far as we can tell the opposite is happening, WFB is selling more, at least in the US and it has always been more popular in Britain and Europe.

[pgarfunkle]

I certainly hope that the system doesn't do away with individual army books, I started playing warhammer when 8th was released with a lizard army and have started wood elves recently and don't want to see these rolled up into other armies.

[Bigred]

Eldargal said:

But that's the thing, as far as we can tell the opposite is happening, WFB is selling more, at least in the US and it has always been more popular in Britain and Europe.

We have heard the opposite. That while there are some small regional variances for one system or the other, overall, GW has been unable to "turn it around" and the ratios are only accelerating against WFB.

[Wildeybeast]

So what do you do? What is the best solution to continue to support the smaller gamesystem, not alienate its fans, but acknowledge that system A is where you need to be focusing your resources?

See, I agree with this logic, but that doesn't lead to compendiums. In fact, quite the opposite. Compendiums would alienate your existing player base. They wouldn't cut down on the production time, since you need to have 4 armies ready to go before you release the book (GW having learned the hard way of what comes from making people wait years for the models in their book) unless you slash the number of new releases, which costs you money. You would also need to drastically reduce the page space vs the current books as there is no way people will pay 4 times the cost of a current book for three armies they don't want, which costs you yet more money.

I think where this line thought leads us is the direction they are already heading. You smarten up your production. You make sure you have an army which is already all plastic so you can simply put a bit of polish on the book, tweak it for the current edition and release 4-6 new units. That makes the 'one book every other month' system feasible, keeping your production costs down and your sales volume high, not to mention allowing for a new rule set every 2-3 years. You can release a few 'wow' models that generate plenty of demand and sell at high price and the quick turnover of books stops the 'player leakage' to other systems. If I were them, I'd leave every army in this state by the end of 8th (which requires more work with some than others), but it leaves them in an excellent position to make a healthy profit on 9th.

[Chronowraith]

Eldargal said:


We have heard the opposite. That while there are some small regional variances for one system or the other, overall, GW has been unable to "turn it around" and the ratios are only accelerating against WFB.

I'm not too certain that Fantasy sales have been dropping. I am more inclined to think that the disparity between 40k and Fantasy sales is due to the stagnation of Fantasy sales and the growth of 40k sales rather than the stagnation of 40k (or even growth) and the decline in fantasy sales. Do the annual reports GW produces list the revenue for each game system? I've never dug that deeply into them.

I do know that prior to 8th edition, most stores around here, other than the ones with big online presence such as Miniature Market, had very little Fantasy stock on hand. Now, they have a much broader selection and while that stock is usually more limited than 40k, I can still go there and find roughly 75% of what I need rather than the 33-50% I experienced prior to 8th edition.

I agree with Wildey that one way GW could focus on it's flagship product would simply be to stretch out the product cycle for Fantasy as compared to 40k. Make editions last 6-7 years instead of 4-5. Personally, I'd like to see them shore up all the books in 8th, make minor tweaks to the basic game in 9th (make magic less powerful but more reliable, fix disruption, etc), and then move to narrative expansions like Warmachine where every race gets a minor update with each book. The narrative book for GW would be a great way to make sure sales stay up for each army instead of this wax/wane scheme they have now.

[MarneusCalgar]

Eldargal said:


We have heard the opposite. That while there are some small regional variances for one system or the other, overall, GW has been unable to "turn it around" and the ratios are only accelerating against WFB.



Here in Spain, Europe, we always had more WFB players than 40K ones... but from 40K´s 4th Ed the balance changed... and now you can find much more 40K players than WFB ones...

Why?

It´s, even with GW price hikes, cheaper to acquire and play... as BigRed said... with 1 or 2 tanks / fliers, one batallion and one HQ box / blister, about 250 euros, you can begin playing

[GrauGeist]

"Significant changes to the rules and army books" is simply a copypaste of the current (terrible) 40k Allies rules, in search of selling more models in ever more arcane combinations, rather than pushing for balance and smooth play. 40k is bloated and slow, and one can expect the next Fantasy to take the same steps of slowing the game down to push more and more model sales. Mark my words, 9th Edition Fantasy is going to be nothing but Daemons and Dark Elves Allied like GK & Necrons in 40k.

[GrauGeist]

So what do you do? What is the best solution to continue to support the smaller gamesystem, not alienate its fans, but acknowledge that system A is where you need to be focusing your resources?

Now lets say that those ratios are more than 2 to 1, and getting worse over time...

With any luck, the GW board will kill Fantasy in the middle of the night, just like they did with Specialist Games.

[GrauGeist]

GW has been unable to "turn it around" and the ratios are only accelerating against WFB.

Maybe it's because GW stopped paying attention to the actual game, and instead played a subgame of "how much will our customers pay for our models, despite them no longer being clearly better than any our rapidly-growing competition, and decidedly worse in many case, due to line bloat?".

6th edition wasn't bad. 7th started the bloat and ignoring balance. 8th started pushing randomness over tactics. At that point, I decided I didn't want to play, and I'm not alone.

GW doesn't do the hard work, so they don't deserve the sales.

[GrauGeist]

I would imagine that WFB is having real problems not with the existing playerbase, but with enticing new players to join the hobby.

No, it's both. My playgroup of 5 hasn't played WFB in years, because it's just not fun. So we're not adding anyone.

And the idea of starting big armies for several hundred dollars is laughable. I have more fun with $100-200 worth of BattleLore than I've had in the past few years of Fantasy. $100-200 worth of Super Dungeon Explore goes a long way, too.

A new player taking that same $500 that the might have spent on GW, and throwing it at 5x $100 miniatures board games will get more play value, and the new minis board games kickstarters only drive that home in a big way.

$140 Robotech
$100 Zombicide 2
$100 Sedition Wars
$160 Super Dungeon Explore w/ Expansions

Same $500 spent, and how much gaming is there. How accessible are those games? What's the prep, setup and teardown? Oh, and it's roughly 400 models grand total, try getting anywhere close to that from GW...

[Kirsten]

With any luck, the GW board will kill Fantasy in the middle of the night, just like they did with Specialist Games.

never going to happen

Maybe it's because GW stopped paying attention to the actual game, and instead played a subgame of "how much will our customers pay for our models, despite them no longer being clearly better than any our rapidly-growing competition, and decidedly worse in many case, due to line bloat?".

6th edition wasn't bad. 7th started the bloat and ignoring balance. 8th started pushing randomness over tactics. At that point, I decided I didn't want to play, and I'm not alone.

GW doesn't do the hard work, so they don't deserve the sales.

that is certainly not a common opinion however, we have masses of fantasy players here, new players all the time, and 8th edition is held to be the best yet by a good way.

[eldargal]

8th started pushing randomness over tactics. At that point, I decided I didn't want to play, and I'm not alone.
Sorry but this is something said by people who have no idea what they are talking about. We have random charge distances. We have no more range guessing or abstract LOS. Daemons got a few random abilities, the horror! As for tactics, that is pure nonsense. 8th edition is no more or less tactical than any other edition, but the tactics have changed. You might fail a charge, you need to adapt to that possibility. To suggest it requires no tactics is simply moronic.

[Chronowraith]

8th started pushing randomness over tactics. At that point, I decided I didn't want to play, and I'm not alone.



It's a game where everything is decided by rolling dice.. combat, magic, resolve, etc... it was like that in the past and it is still like that now. Adding in a few new random rolls like winds of magic and random charges doesn't make the game less tactical, it simply changes the math. You do realize that you can always measure now, right? So you went from guesswork in previous editions to playing the odds in 8th. It's not more random, it's simply a different kind of randomness.

GWs corporate decisions stretch across all the game systems. Fantasy is not being singled out and indeed the desire for more people to purchase models in 40k is more evident with the expansion of flyers and large models in 40k.

You also miss the point when it comes to entry price point. At my game store they don't play Super Dungeon Explorer, Sedition Wars, and Robotech isn't even available yet. People play what they can find people to play. At my game store they play 40k, Fantasy, Warmahordes, and the occasional Malifaux (and some special events of Zombicide).

[Mr Mystery]

If you want a supposedly tactical game, where by tactics you mean predictable, Warmahordes is for you. You see, I can pretty much guarantee you that your opponent is looking to kill you Warcaster, and pull off their Feat. These two are almostly certainly linked. Likewise, I expect you will show the same tactical shrewdness of trying to kill their Warcaster with your Feat. Game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game after game...... Until you get bored and die of boredom of the face and brain.

Meanwhile, I'll be playing Fantasy, where my army can be undone by fate, and there is no such occurence as a 'sure thing'. A game which thereby keeps me on my toes, and forces my army to be tactically flexible. Gone magic heavy? Best pray the dice gods want to give you a healthy amount of power dice. Playing an army that ideally needs to pick and choose it's combats? Better hope your charge hits home, because you don't have it all your own way these days.

[Cap'nSmurfs]

I love all these people who are all "tactics! Superior generalship!" when in the real world winning battles of the kind Fantasy is influenced by basically came down to trying to get to a superior bit of a field with more peasants who hate you slightly less than the other guy's collection of peasants, sending them to kill each other, hoping a stray arrow doesn't hit you, and then hoping that his peasants run away faster than yours.

Warfare is kind of a chance-ridden activity, non?

[bfmusashi]

I think the cost of entry is an issue, but not a massive one. Yes, a Warmahordes battle group is about $30 online vs. $80+ for a GW army box but it comes down to what your friends are playing. I have not seen anyone playing WFB in over a year. I know they're doing it as there are fliers up for tournaments, but I see a 40k or Warmahordes game being played whenever I go into a geek store. If they were worried about generating interest I'd expect them to start packing in quick-start rules with the starter kits and give them parity in points.
And Mr.Mystery, you have nailed it sir. All the scenarios in the rulebook mean nothing when you can win them all by 'killing the warcaster.'

[Mr Mystery]

Fantasy can also be seen as a 'graduation game'.

Tactically, it's significantly more involved than a Skirmish game. Your movements are a lot more restricted, nothing is guaranteed, and a great deal can go wrong in even the best planned strategy. It's simply not an entry level game. It does involve a lot more models, and that in itself is a massive part of it's appeal. Not everybody is a breadhead when it comes to their hobby. As long as I enjoy something, I'll happily pay for it.

For instance, I have spent hundreds on my Ogre army, because it's my favourite by a country mile. It's unique in it's playstyle. No other game has anything that comes close to a gutbunker smashing up the enemies front line and shrugging off incoming damage.

I don't want to see Fantasy dumbed down to the level of a skirmish game. That would suck. If I wanted a skirmish game, guess what, I'd go and play one. But I don't. I want a grand, sweeping battle, where hundreds of models die needless deaths, where heroes fall in ill advised last stands. A battlefield where a wizard, thinking he can control the raw stuff of chaos simply detonates, wiping out half his unit.

If you don't want these go play something else because that been the core of Warhammer for pretty much ever...

[pauljc]

I think they have to do something about the fundamental issue with WFB at this time in the overall wargaming space - its enormous barrier to entry.

No other game out there demands you pay so much, assemble so many miniatures, paint them all up, then face a steep learning curve with the rules before you are up and feeling like a competent player.

Ten years ago, GW could get away with it, but imagine a new gamer wanting to get into the hobby walking into a store with several hundred dollars.

You get the rundown of what it takes to start up:
Warhammer 40,000
Warhammer Fantasy
Warmachine
Infinity
X-Wing
Flames of War
DUST Warfare

I would imagine that WFB is having real problems not with the existing playerbase, but with enticing new players to join the hobby.

The game desperately needs a "smaller scale" version so folks can enter and get up and playing faster. Army book consolidation makes sense from the perspective of manpower resources. If you make triple the revenue from 40k as WFB, how can you justify to the board spending equal development resources on both systems. Now you can't drop any armies, and GW's primary goal is the production and selling of miniatures. So you shrink the development resources by decreasing the product size of the 15+ army books WFB currently demands. Ta-da.

Off the top of my head I could easily see something like:
Forces of Order: Empire, Bret, Dwarves, High Elves, Wood Elves
Forces of Chaos: Daemons, Warriors, Beastmen
Ravening Hordes: Orks, Ogres, Skaven, Lizardmen
Forces of Darkness VC, Khemri, Dark Elves

But yeah, the allies - mixing and matching would be the challenge to balance out.

I disagree with this completely. Starting prices for miniature games are all very comparable. So far, Bolt Action was the cheapest game I got into recently.

Warhammer/40K starter boxes cost about €78, and include full rules and over €200 worth of miniatures.
The Warmachine starter costs approx. €100 at full retail, and includes far less in the box.
Flames of War new starter is €60.
Infinity starter box plus the rulebook is about €60
Dust Tactics starter is €80
Don't get me started on the SINGLE miniature costs of X-Wing.. I have a customer order sitting right here, the Slave-1 for €30..

"But I don't want the High Elves in that box!" - then trade them for something else. eBay them. Go halves on the starter with a friend. Whatever.

So, you see, all very comparable. There isn't any rule demanding you START a new army at 2500 points! Start with 1000 points, build a core, skirmish a bit, then add to it month by month.

Whatever happened to the join of building an army bit by bit, seeing it grow, putting aside some of your cash every few weeks to go buy the cool new model that just came out for your army. Nowadays it seems like everyone wants a fully functional tournament army by next week. And with free delivery, please!

[pauljc]

No, it's both. My playgroup of 5 hasn't played WFB in years, because it's just not fun. So we're not adding anyone.

And the idea of starting big armies for several hundred dollars is laughable. I have more fun with $100-200 worth of BattleLore than I've had in the past few years of Fantasy. $100-200 worth of Super Dungeon Explore goes a long way, too.

A new player taking that same $500 that the might have spent on GW, and throwing it at 5x $100 miniatures board games will get more play value, and the new minis board games kickstarters only drive that home in a big way.

$140 Robotech
$100 Zombicide 2
$100 Sedition Wars
$160 Super Dungeon Explore w/ Expansions

Same $500 spent, and how much gaming is there. How accessible are those games? What's the prep, setup and teardown? Oh, and it's roughly 400 models grand total, try getting anywhere close to that from GW...

Completely disagree. Boardgames with miniatures are nowhere near as open-ended as miniature games. Eventually you will learn every angle, combination, game choice, turn tactic, and maneuver coded into the game by it's designers, and barring the continual purchase of expansions, eventually, all subsequent games end the same way.

Whereas, in over 25 years of wargaming, pretty much every game I have ever played has been different, if even by a small degree.

[bfmusashi]

I disagree with this completely. Starting prices for miniature games are all very comparable. So far, Bolt Action was the cheapest game I got into recently.

Warhammer/40K starter boxes cost about €78, and include full rules and over €200 worth of miniatures.
The Warmachine starter costs approx. €100 at full retail, and includes far less in the box.
Flames of War new starter is €60.
Infinity starter box plus the rulebook is about €60
Dust Tactics starter is €80
Don't get me started on the SINGLE miniature costs of X-Wing.. I have a customer order sitting right here, the Slave-1 for €30..

"But I don't want the High Elves in that box!" - then trade them for something else. eBay them. Go halves on the starter with a friend. Whatever.

So, you see, all very comparable. There isn't any rule demanding you START a new army at 2500 points! Start with 1000 points, build a core, skirmish a bit, then add to it month by month.

Whatever happened to the join of building an army bit by bit, seeing it grow, putting aside some of your cash every few weeks to go buy the cool new model that just came out for your army. Nowadays it seems like everyone wants a fully functional tournament army by next week. And with free delivery, please!

I do not know the EU prices for Privateer Press, but every faction battlegroup comes with an abridged copy of the rules, every model you need to play a game, use the fancy abilities and are roughly balanced to each other. It's $50 in the US at retail. The only thing you need to buy are dice, dry erase markers, and maybe templates. Infinity's rules are legitimately available online for free so, you don't need the box to play. If you want to play WFB though you can buy the box if you want Skaven (and you should) or High Elves and you're okay, but if you want to play one of the other factions you're boned. After buying the army box you have a force full of some kind of points that still isn't legal for play. Oh, and good luck figuring out what you need to buy without the army book.
The problem, I think, with WFB is the box set does nothing to ease you into the game. Here's a bunch of units with different rules, good luck getting it all straight at once sukkas! It doesn't even come with stats for your troops or how to use them, you have to hunt that down on the website and print it out. The box fails to accomplish its primary goal, teach you how to play.
Cost of entry does not help. If you want an army that didn't come in the starter box, you aren't receiving any charity, and you are paying retail WFB has a entry cost of $90 (beastman battalion) + $33 (beastman army book) + $13.25 (grey bray shaman) for a grand total of $136.25 before tax for an army of indeterminate points cost and viability. Ho ho, but you still need a rulebook, so do you buy $74 tome that's pretty easy to read or pay the extra $15 and get the tiny print book, dice, templates, measuring sticks, and dudes you don't want to play with? You are now in $200+ for a game you haven't played yet and that has no single player mode.
I do not play Infinity, but I'm certain it has a lower cost of entry and I know for a fact Warmachine/Hordes does. Price of entry is certainly cheaper if you want to play High Elves and Skaven but two factions out of fifteen is not going to cut it.

[Mr Mystery]

Careful now....take the Warmahordes starter....and double it. You only get one side (I think. Info might be out of date!).

IoB is a self contained game. You don't need to expand upon it. And if you do, it's a great jumping off point as you get a real variety of units.

[bfmusashi]

I don't think it needs doubling since my example was starting a single player off. IoB is a horrible box for introducing a game so I avoided it. If I were comparing it to a board game I'd use the 2 player boxes and they'd be identical MSRP (in USD at least). As far as I know the 2 player starter (which I don't have because I didn't want Khador, Protectorate, Circle, or Legion) doesn't have templates and I don't know if it has the make your own page from the big rule book. I do have IoB, which I bought for Skaven and because my wife showed some interest, which died the moment we realized there were no stats for the units or introduction scenarios that weren't 'put all the units on the board.' IoB also covers 2/15ths of the product line while the PP 2 player sets are 1/3. If you want to play a faction not covered in the 2 player boxes it costs roughly the same ($50) for PP while WFB is $130ish at the cheapest. Shoot, lets add a solo in on some of those battlegroups since they're a few points apart and get it up to $63ish. It's a rough buy in.
If IoB is supposed to be a complete game used for introducing people to a game it should have been designed better. It has lovely models, and looks like it has everything you need until you try to play it. It was designed to cover people transitioning editions, not to introduce new players. If your game in a box is missing the ability to teach the game then you have failed as a designer. It's not even that the company lacks the ability to do so. The Dark Vengeance box does it, the first version of Fantasy I played did it, why did IoB drop the ball?

[JMPfau]

I could see GW doing something along these lines.

Release one Army compendium, lets's say Armies of the Old World, with rules for VC, Empire, OnG. Then release a sencond called Armies of Worlds End Mountains with rules for Dwarfs, Ogres, Skaven or whomever, with rules for additional units of OnG and Empire that you could use with Armies from the previous book.

This would encourage playes to buy both as opposed to just buying the army book for your current Army.

[Alebelly_Cragfist]

Executive summary:
Do more with the starter game/sets to make it cheaper to start playing and/or try new armies without having to buy numerous books or boxes

Each starter army to count as a balanced core choice vs all other boxed-starter armies for a limited points game that can be expanded upon by separate rare and special box choices when players know the rules better.

If GW want to increase mini sales, diminish the power of single miniatures (aka lessen the effects of mages)

Have basic (box) and advanced (book) rule sets to appeal to the beginner and veteran

Don’t force cookie cutter builds with min/maxed race unit types (everyone has a Dwarf anvil and HElf hammer)

Don’t introduce power creep by adding new regiments of renown type units that you have to buy to remain competitive

Musings:
The boxed game of WHFB is great value afaic. You get two armies, and with a bit of time spent cutting and clipping/gluing, you can start to play the game. For brand new players, saying "Here you go, this is everything you need to start, that'll be £60 please" is not bad at all. How is that expensive? I wish this would be expanded upon so that new players could buy another army once they basics had been learned, with an army list in the starter-battalion box. Again, no need for an AB, just buy the box of minis and you’re set with a balanced list against all the other start sets and the main boxed game.

Once you have the hang of the game and have chosen your favourite race, you can graduate to the main rulebook and an army book.

The ability to buy several out of the box playable armies will no doubt encourage many of us to try another race as you wouldn't need the huge initial investment. Each starter-battalion won’t have all the frills and spills, but will form the bulk of the core choice that you would have to pay for in points anyway. Beyond this, you start to introduce rare and special choices. For me at least, this would work and encourage me to have a far larger miniature collection than I currently have. I can swallow losing, say £50 on a plastic starter army, rather than £200 min.

I know this isn’t drastically dissimilar to what already exists with battalions, but the rules don’t support the beginner and advanced set up so well as it could. Parents, I am sure, would be far happier paying a one off fee that is similar to the price of a board game compared to the awkward “So, Timmy, how many of these men do you need to play? ... HOW MUCH?!"

While I’m musing, make magic less game changing and change it so that the majority of spells are unit boons. What is better for miniature sales, 400 points spent on 20-30 infantry or 1 wizard? If you could remove the option of “I win!” spells, I believe there would be greater benefits to both tactical gameplay and bottom line profitability.

I struggle to think how mixed armies will add to a miniature range. For example, there is bound to be “the best” units for each task, such as anvils and hammers. If you had, say 15 anvil units to support as you want to keep racial diversity; my betting would be that the majority of players would opt for the best min/max option. This would lead to cookie cutter armies of Order and Chaos that everybody played. So, in reality only a good and bad version of an anvil and a hammer unit. You could add in others with different dynamics, but no doubt these would be situational and the majority of encounters would be served better by the min/maxed option.

In real terms, this would suit the bottom line as you would only need a handful of injection moulds and be able to get your return back far quicker as you’d be pumping out tens of thousands rather than hundreds. But, the flavour and attraction of the game would be leached out, to the point where you could sell one boxed game with both factions and leave it at that.

There may well need to be an equalising list released with 9th to make sure each race is playable. But, not being able to play the race you want for fear of being beaten every time if you didn’t take the cookie cutter lists is in no way fun. The amount of proxying going on would be significant. “These aren’t Hammerers, they’re Sword Masters, but I don’t like painting HElfs.” Etc. A revamped allies rules to promote wider collections of more than one army is fine and understandable. But if it goes deeper than this, many could be alienated outside of tournament lists.

[Kirsten]

If GW want to increase mini sales, diminish the power of single miniatures (aka lessen the effects of mages)

Don’t force cookie cutter builds with min/maxed race unit types (everyone has a Dwarf anvil and HElf hammer)

Don’t introduce power creep by adding new regiments of renown type units that you have to buy to remain competitive


I have yet to see a game where a mage has an overwhelming effect personally. I have used high magic, ogre magic, chaos magic, and battle magic, and am yet to achieve anything significant with it since 8th came out, it is far too random to ever rely on.

GW have never forced cookie cutter builds before so I wouldn't worry now

I don't see power creep being an issue either.

Starter sets for each army that were better value and came with a rules sheet of some kind would be a fantastic way of going, I really like that idea.

[Alebelly_Cragfist]

I have yet to see a game where a mage has an overwhelming effect personally. I have used high magic, ogre magic, chaos magic, and battle magic, and am yet to achieve anything significant with it since 8th came out, it is far too random to ever rely on.
I'm sure we all have different experiences, but there are plenty of anecdotes that speak of magic having a major role to play. But, that in and of itself wasn't the main crux of the point I was trying to make :) If GW really is a "miniature collecting hobby first and foremost" then diminishing the effects of mages and other hero models would mean points better spent on units. Which would mean mini sales. It would be an easy thing for GW to do to promote mini sales and not be a major rethink on rulebooks and volumes.


GW have never forced cookie cutter builds before so I wouldn't worry now
Perhaps, although even now each army has a more competitive set of standard builds. Some armies only have one or two. My personal fear is that by allowing a player to pick and choose his units from a number of armies, even if restricting that choice for some fluff maintenance reasons, there is likely to be a number of clear winners in which race/function unit performs best overall. This has at least been hinted at. Whether or not it comes true is another issue, of course :)


I don't see power creep being an issue either.
One of the hints has been frequent, continuing releases of new and shiny units with new rules, outside of the standard lists. The explanation is that GW want people to buy minis all the time, so they need to encourage people to do so even if hey have a large army already. This would mean great new minis, sure, but is also likely to require rules for that specific regiment for more of a sweetener. If the rules aint all that great, people are less likely to buy them for their games. That is conjecture and jumping to conclusions perhaps, but it is a possiblity if you follow the logic of the hint.

[eldargal]

It's not just conjecture it's wrong. There is this perception that the new kits will have OP rules to boost sales but the reverse is true more often and the rules are average to lacklustre. Rarely they are overpowered but in general the balance is fairly even. As to power creep 8th edition has been remarkably free of that so far to the extent each time a book comes out it is ALWAYS compared unfavourably to the old broken 7th edition books but not to other 8th ed books.

[Alebelly_Cragfist]

We can't say it's right or wrong until it happens :) It is conjecture based upon the rumours, but it isn't wrong because whatever is going to happen in 9th hasn't happened yet. Unless, of course you're privy to what 9th is going to be, in which case please enlighten us all ;)

All we really have to go on is Hastings and he's increasingly more jaded on the issue, so it may well have been painted in a more pessimistic "only about sales" tone, granted.

Best case scenario is 9th is amazing, balanced and we can each play fluffy lists competitively, FAQs are a thing of the past and the fluff is added to rather than detracted from. (*crosses fingers*) But, reading the glimpses we have been given, I can't say I'm overly optimistic about a release that is concerned with making more margin above and beyond other core considerations.

I hope it's great, but my fear is GW are making gross assumptions on what will sell long term.

[bfmusashi]

The boxed game of WHFB is great value afaic. You get two armies, and with a bit of time spent cutting and clipping/gluing, you can start to play the game. For brand new players, saying "Here you go, this is everything you need to start, that'll be £60 please" is not bad at all. How is that expensive? I wish this would be expanded upon so that new players could buy another army once they basics had been learned, with an army list in the starter-battalion box. Again, no need for an AB, just buy the box of minis and you’re set with a balanced list against all the other start sets and the main boxed game.


You can not play WFB with just the components included in IoB.

[Alebelly_Cragfist]

You can not play WFB with just the components included in IoB.
2 armies, rules, templates, dice. Other than an opponent and a kitchen table top, what else do you need? <EDIT> Tape measure isn't in the box, but that's all I can think of and more than likely to hand in most Dad's toolboxes.


The Island of Blood Warhammer boxed game has everything you need to start playing Warhammer, containing two complete armies ready to assemble and put straight on the battlefield...

...Also included in the set is a full-colour rulebook that contains all the information you'll need to play games of Warhammer.

[Kirsten]

I'm sure we all have different experiences, but there are plenty of anecdotes that speak of magic having a major role to play. But, that in and of itself wasn't the main crux of the point I was trying to make :) If GW really is a "miniature collecting hobby first and foremost" then diminishing the effects of mages and other hero models would mean points better spent on units. Which would mean mini sales. It would be an easy thing for GW to do to promote mini sales and not be a major rethink on rulebooks and volumes.

it is very unlikely for magic to have a major effect though. with an average of seven power dice you are looking at two to three spells a turn at moderate casting levels, with at least one of those being dispelled.
There are very few characters needed at the moment, I really don't think they detract from sales at all.

[Power Klawz]

I'll just keep saying this forever. Stop selling rules.

In the age of digital piracy and internet access you're just going to keep seeing diminishing returns. You need to keep writing the rules of course, but what you're really in business for is to sell plastic. Sell really nice deluxe editions on a print-per-order basis and then make everything available digitally for a small fee with free updates for those who paid for them. Stop moving editions and simply release major content updates. You've been doing this for decades now, you should have the basic framework of your rules worked out, now just make updates as needed and sell models.

This artificial dynamism we see with the march of editions is plainly transparent at this point. Maybe the first few times they just shoved out a new edition with a few rules twists here and there and then slowly released a smattering of army books it really seemed like progress, but when we're looking at things like wood elves and bretonnians in the modern age its rudely apparent that the game has been contracting and stagnating despite all those version changes.

If you want to sell plastic minis you need to make them exciting enough to buy, and you don't do that by artificially creating need via obvious rules tweaks (lol hordes) and tacked on new units (whatever that tentacle monster is for chaos warriors.) You do this through true creativity, something that's been sorely lacking for quite some time now. The last time I looked at WFB and went "wow thats so cool" was when they rolled out the lizardmen army. That was a very long time ago.

When you remove the barriers to creativity ie: pointlessly restrictive publishing practices, you create a more exciting product, a more exciting product sells better, you get more money and can create more plastic miniatures, which you can then update and create rules for instantaneously and thereby sell more plastic miniatures.

The creative forces behind games workshop used to just churn out ideas with no thought to the consequences, that's how they built the modern GW. They struggled to manufacture what their imaginations had tossed out into the world, which had its own problems I suppose. They've since gone in entirely the opposite direction, afraid to let their imagination outpace their production capability even a little bit and so we have such travesties as dark eldar sitting on the shelf for years despite being conceptually complete, stagnation of certain armies and abandonment of others. They're too worried about squeezing every possible dime from the niche they've carved to take anything even remotely resembling a risk, and when you reach a certain point of risk aversion you're no longer building anything, you're simply trying to slow down the inevitable disintegration of what remains.

[Kirsten]

that is just your opinion though, I completely disagree with you.

[Power Klawz]

that is just your opinion though, I completely disagree with you.

Yeah well, that's just like... your opinion man.

[Kirsten]

man.

how dare you :p

[Power Klawz]

I'd have taken GW digital a decade ago and tossed out the old pen and paper paradigm as soon as it became technologically viable to do so. (ie: once pc and/or smart phone ownership had reached appropriate market saturation, which was some time ago, especially for the target demographic of miniature games.)

I guess there's the chance of alienating your long time fanbase, but I don't think most kids who grew up in the 80s onwards have an overly difficult time figuring out PCs and apps.

[bfmusashi]

2 armies, rules, templates, dice. Other than an opponent and a kitchen table top, what else do you need? <EDIT> Tape measure isn't in the box, but that's all I can think of and more than likely to hand in most Dad's toolboxes.

How about stats for the models?

[Power Klawz]

How about stats for the models?

Uh... wut?

I'm totally going home and rummaging through what's left of my IoB box to see if this is true. To be honest I didn't spend any time looking through any of the publications that were provided, but I'm almost certain there were stats provided for all the units. Maybe not the most correct stats with all the special rules, but there were enough stats to play a game.

[Alebelly_Cragfist]

There's a booklet that comes with the abridged rules to alow you to field both armies (stats, background etc). It would be a little short-sighted of GW to give you a game that you couldn't play with something so fundamental.

[bfmusashi]

Funny, 'cause my box didn't come with stats. I had to dig through the "Read this first" book to find a url which took me to the website where I could print a stat sheet. IoB is a mess.