A New Take On WFB 9th

[Bigred]

Warseer's scoopdeta (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?388436-Warhammer-Fantasy-Changes-on-the-Horizon) says:


With all the news surrounding Games Workshop over the last couple of weeks I think that it lines up fairly well. I was able to grab lunch with an old friend about a month ago who works for GW (not a local store croney). We talked everything GW and of course my drug of choice Warhammer Fantasy. He said that over the next coupel of months there would be drastic changes to the way GW does business...this was just in general. He didn't give me too many specifics, but now that the White Dwarf changes have hit the street openly and the news of a revamped website with FW product offerings and all it lines up. Once again he didnt come out and say that GW was going to be taking a hit with the earnings, but he stated that many of the changes had to do with new strategies to increase revenue and such. He has been traveling non-stop for new training and meetings, so it was easy to see something was coming down the pipe.

So on to my main point. I have always been a fantasy fanatic...game of choice hands down. He stated that there would be a new release which would change the way fantasy is currently played. Currently, the idea is to have huge blocks of infantry and high priced special characters and beasts which makes for higher costs to players and conceptually more revenue for GW. However this did not work fo rone reason or another. So it was obvious some changes were needed. The new approach will aim at bringing more people back into the game by making it smaller and more affordable. The new rule set would focus on making warhammer more of a small block and skirmish based game with fewer miniatures needed. The new box set would have less miniatures, but would basically set people up to get in the game and playing at a much reduced cost.

So he didnt give me the finer deatails that I would have liked, but he did say this would happen this summer for sure...not next year. He basically said that GW is being forced to make some changes due to some cash flow issues...which has become evident since we had lunch several weeks ago. It seems like he was pretty spot on so far with his vague statements...haha...take it as you will. But I have faith in this for many reasons. It seems with everything going on that it would line up well and make sense. GW needs a way to bring more people back intothe game while also doing soemthing to help bring fanatsy back up to strength.

Followed up by this clarification:


Perhaps my terminology was distorted a bit in my OP. I do not believe my friend was indicating that this would be a "skirmish" game similar to Hordes or infinity. What he had stated was that it would head back in the direction of some older editions where smaller blocks were more viable. Seems people missed the smaller block protion and just focused on the skirmish portion of my OP. I am have no idea if he was saying this would be a new edition or a supplement. But my feeling was that this would be a replacement of the current ruleset. And it does line up with the smaller boxes (10 minis per). People could by a box or two and have a whole unit...instead of having to spend $200 on just one unit at 40 strong. This would allow GW to maintain the current price point while not scaring people away with the overall price of an army as they would now inherently be smaller.

[eldargal]

That makes a lot of sense actually, if you could start playing well balanced games of WFB at 500pts and then scale up to 1000,1500 etc. you would get a lot more people getting into the game and building up their armies rather than feeling the need to drop hundreds of pounds for a 1500pt army on one hit. I mean WFB is reasonably well balanced at 1000pts apart from a few things but it could be better. 40k by contrast is reasonably well balanced at 750pts and then you have Kill Team.

[daboarder]

I would join fantasy we're an army easier to collect thats for sure

[Mr Mystery]

Does make sense.

I for one am a sweeping scale fanatic, but there is absolutely no reason that the game cannot be rejigged to cover smaller game.

[CrAzY424]

I would love to go back to the 6th edition feel for units. I remember my 20 man Ironbreaker unit was one of the toughest nuts to crack. Not so much anymore.

[Cap'nSmurfs]

I'm sure the design brief is to make sure it works with both huge armies and smaller ones, yeah. Warhammer isn't really as daunting as people think it is, but the *perception* is a strong one worth combatting. This all sounds pretty legit!

[Mr Mystery]

I think they may have slightly shot themselves in the foot with the sheer coolness that 8th Ed brought to the table.

It enabled massive blocks of infantry and armies of impressive size. And as we Warhammer Fanatics already had long established armies, that was the most common sight for newcomers to see...honking great big armies. In giving us what we've always wanted, the impact of that could not have been predicted fully.

So keep as is, but introduce new smaller scale encouragement and scenarios. Lovely.

[Morgrim]

I'm keen on this. I haven't started WFB because I want to finish and build a small 500-600 point force that I can use to actually learn with, and it'd be nice to know it wasn't horribly unbalanced and that people other than the store redshirts would be willing to give me a game at that points level.

[pgarfunkle]

I'm in for anything that brings more people to playing WFB

[tankbusta]

That makes a lot of sense actually, if you could start playing well balanced games of WFB at 500pts and then scale up to 1000,1500 etc. you would get a lot more people getting into the game and building up their armies rather than feeling the need to drop hundreds of pounds for a 1500pt army on one hit. I mean WFB is reasonably well balanced at 1000pts apart from a few things but it could be better. 40k by contrast is reasonably well balanced at 750pts and then you have Kill Team.

I agree. I am a miniature collector/painter with a gaming problem, so being able to play some games with less minimum buy-in would be nice. I remember about a decade ago how much fun the "Warhammer Skirmish" scenarios were, especially if you threw one in between big games in a WFB campaign. there were even optional rules that the skirmish game results affected the subsequent larger game if you liked.

As with 40K, I think part of the problem is finding people who are willing to play small games. It's great to play a really big battle that takes 3+ hours to reolve, but I seldom have that much time available. The old "40K in 40 minutes" was a lot of fun.

[Mike Lawler]

If you look at it like this.. a new player is interested in.. let's say.. Beastmen.. and wants to add some Minotaurs. Currently, without resorting to outside means (ie bits stores etc), the only way to acquire them is by buying 3 at $47. Granted, that's not as bad as having to sink $70 into Hive Guard.. but it's still an obstacle. Yes, this is a luxury hobby but previously (when I entered this hobby) you could ease into it with single blisters.

[Morquentas]

I suspect you'll still have to buy a new rulebook, which will be at least £30+ I'll reserve judgement and attempt to supress my cynicism but his doesn't seem that different to Island of Blood etc. And if it's a skirmish game where your miniatures can be used in the bigger game, well they have that already. It's called Mordheim.

[crandall87]

Makes a lot of sense really. It's far easier to have a core ruleset that's good for small games and make it bigger with supplements as like 40k than the go big or go home approach it currently is

[Mike Lawler]

Makes a lot of sense really. It's far easier to have a core ruleset that's good for small games and make it bigger with supplements as like 40k than the go big or go home approach it currently is

Even 40k using this approach doesn't make sense to me. Bigger games tend to be tedious and finishing a force that size can be laborious.
Sure Apocalypse was huge when it was released, but 40k in a flash was just a WD article and it was arguably more popular (if you count the variations of smaller 40k related games like Killteam). I have an old WHFB skirmish book around here somewhere and those small missions are a lot more fun than most of the huge battles I have played (at least for me).

I think it would be interesting to see if this approach (opening up more of the smaller unit sizes) will be more effective than if they had kept the unit sizes the way they were and instead lowered cost. I would also very much like to see if just breaking down the more expensive unit boxes into single blisters would have helped..

[Vash108]

I may have to dust off my Tomb Kings army if this is true. The amount of skeletons you needed vs how much you get for a box was pretty ridiculous.

[silashand]

Not keen on the "current pricepoint" idea. Still no way I am ever going to spend what they want for the new Witch Elves.

[eldargal]

I suspect you'll still have to buy a new rulebook, which will be at least £30+ I'll reserve judgement and attempt to supress my cynicism but his doesn't seem that different to Island of Blood etc. And if it's a skirmish game where your miniatures can be used in the bigger game, well they have that already. It's called Mordheim.
Did you read the OP? He quite clearly says it's making small scale Warhammer battles viable, not turning it into a skirmish game:

Perhaps my terminology was distorted a bit in my OP. I do not believe my friend was indicating that this would be a "skirmish" game similar to Hordes or infinity. What he had stated was that it would head back in the direction of some older editions where smaller blocks were more viable. Seems people missed the smaller block protion and just focused on the skirmish portion of my OP. I

[Wildeybeast]

So, here's my question: how do you make it more viable at smaller scales? Someone has already suggested that is what the ten troop boxes are for, but unless they drop the price (£35 for 10 Witch Elves:rolleyes:) that doesn't make it more accessible. You could reduce the points cost of models, especially core, so you need to field less of them, but then that makes larger games prohibitively expensive as you need loads of models. I know I'm not a games designer and with good reason, but I can't imagine how they can make it work better on a smaller scale without a radical overhaul that invariably makes it worse on a larger scale. The obvious way round it would be to basically have two different but linked games, LotR and WotR style.

[Mars Ultor]

Well then I wonder if they'll take out the Horde rule to encourage smaller units. Made sense for some armies like orcs, beastmen, skaven where you have undisciplined troops, but to have a 'horde' of Empire Greatswords is...silly.

[Asymmetrical Xeno]

This would def make Fantasy more appealing to me - I dislike painting and assembling a lot of models as I do not have the time, and if the "hobby" part of my life is spent on sculpting my own stuff, so when it comes to other games I prefer to just get right to the gaming.

I still have that unopened tomb kings batallion somewhere in my house...

[Solution9]

I wouldn't be surprised to see the game return to more of a 6th Ed feel.

[Mr Mystery]

Well then I wonder if they'll take out the Horde rule to encourage smaller units. Made sense for some armies like orcs, beastmen, skaven where you have undisciplined troops, but to have a 'horde' of Empire Greatswords is...silly.

I doubt it.

Enabling smaller games doesn't involve removing rules to enable grander scale games.

Plus, it would bugger up my Ogres. I like having all 18 get a chance at hitting the enemy :p

[Wildeybeast]

Yeah, you don't have to take advantage of the hordes rule, it's just there if you want.

[Mr Mystery]

Though I reckon we might see a tweak to steadfast. As it stands, natural horde armies can be a bugger to break, even with a serious hammer blow.

Not sure what it would be, but I think we'll see it. A tricksy version might be the combat modifier being reduced by excess ranks. Won't save you from a panelling, but will help against narrow squeaks.

[Bigred]

It could be interesting to see the opposite of the horde rules, where you might have

"small units" - some type of movement/maneuver benefits
"normal units" - standard rules
"giant units" - horde benefits

Then you could introduce new army and play philosophies that don't punish folks with smaller easier to collect and paint units.

[Mr Mystery]

Very true.

Just as long as we don't revert to skirmish armies having manoeuvring all their own way again. Very frustrating to play against with blocks of infantry.

[CrAzY424]

It could be interesting to see the opposite of the horde rules, where you might have

"small units" - some type of movement/maneuver benefits
"normal units" - standard rules
"giant units" - horde benefits

Then you could introduce new army and play philosophies that don't punish folks with smaller easier to collect and paint units.

This is a really good idea, and would approve of it being introduced.

[evanger]

This is a really good idea, and would approve of it being introduced.

I agree. Having a clear cut, non-combat benefit to small (and presumably agile) units would be great.

Not only in moving, but in deciding where and when to move and effectively communicating that info completely to all unit members. Perhaps Ld bonus for swift reforms or something.

Small units should be able to do all sorts of things more easily, just based on the efficiency of communication.

Hordes should be slower and more ungainly when it comes to disseminating orders throughout the ranks.

[Mr Mystery]

They are already arguably more manouvrable.

A horde has a massive wheel footprint, and a deep unit going for steadfast often lacks room.

Doesn't mean it can't be tweaked, but there ups and downs existent.

[evanger]

They are already arguably more manouvrable.

A horde has a massive wheel footprint, and a deep unit going for steadfast often lacks room.

Doesn't mean it can't be tweaked, but there ups and downs existent.

True. I think there may be something to the notion of

"In a small unit directions and orders can be passed along more quickly."

Something related to reforms, or other Ld intensive activities, perhaps.

[Mr Mystery]

That could be cool. As long as we don't see a return to the abject tedium of MSU.....

As I (think) I've said before, they need to rebalance the scale of the game. I'm a big fan of 3000+, as it lets me really get my toys out. But there's no need for that to be necessary to enjoy the game.

[artisturn]

Only problems I have had with small games is magic is to powerful, If magic can be scaled for smaller games that would solve some of the problems.

[Lord-Boofhead]

Warseer's scoopdeta (http://www.warseer.com/forums/showthread.php?388436-Warhammer-Fantasy-Changes-on-the-Horizon) says:
...
The new approach will aim at bringing more people back into the game by making it smaller and more affordable. The new rule set would focus on making warhammer more of a small block and skirmish based game with fewer miniatures needed. The new box set would have less miniatures, but would basically set people up to get in the game and playing at a much reduced cost.
...


Thsi is already in the works remember how last year there was a bunch of Warhammer Wolrld 'Killteam' events? Culminating in Killteam being released as a rule Set As part of the Christmas Advent thing?


Take a look at Regiment of Renown.

- - - Updated - - -


I wouldn't be surprised to see the game return to more of a 6th Ed feel.

It already has.