Barkanaut Posted June 30, 2018 Share Posted June 30, 2018 Yeah next year for 40k is going to be nuts. I wouldn't be surprised to see AoS take a slight back seat next year. I kind of like that if they keep it like that. One year is 40k focused with AoS being minor. Then the flip then back again ect. It gives both games time to grow and keeps all the audiences happy for both. Who knows though. Maybe GW has enough manpower to focus on both equally through the year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDM Posted June 30, 2018 Share Posted June 30, 2018 I agree next year is gonna be massive for 40k. Maybe even earlier, all codexes will be upto date very soon leaving space to actually release what they and us want. LOADS of models and also campaign supplements and box games, very much excited to jump back in with 40k when they start the next phase of lore and model releases! I think we will see a campaign centered around space wolves and orks this year, possibly with a full ork release and leman russ (dual build?) Then it could be the sequel to dark imperium possibly tied into a big slaanesh release for both systems! Exciting times coming for 40k but we're already here for AoS!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOMUS Posted July 1, 2018 Share Posted July 1, 2018 AoS will never be finished, it will evolve as time goes along. It's a business, the day it's complete is the day the money stop rolling in. Think of how games like destiny are marketed, years of scheduled DLC planned for. The same applies to AoS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaleb Daark Posted July 1, 2018 Share Posted July 1, 2018 no because the chaos gods won't let it as it would mean that nagash has won and will just sit there doing nothing other than wearing his big hat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EccentricCircle Posted July 1, 2018 Share Posted July 1, 2018 To be fair, it is a pretty nice hat... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corvak Posted July 1, 2018 Share Posted July 1, 2018 If the lore ever got too unwieldy, and models stop selling, theyll just do what they did to WHFB again. Personally, I think the design team has put the game on a better foundation that prevents that from happening - or at least gives them the freedom to change without needing the complete nuclear option again. The issue with the World that Was, is that it was finite - the factions and areas were well mapped out, and a lot of potential doors were closed to GW by their own writing. In 40k and the mortal realms, there is a lot of empty space for players to fill in themselves, and ways to introduce new armies. In 40k, you've got an unlimited number of planets. On the Mortal Realms, you get points of interest and important cities, and a lot of gray areas that can be filled in with...anything, really. Stormcast Eternals painted to look like stone, red ironjaws, all the creative hobby stuff players want, without someone pointing out their paint scheme is not canon or whatever. I also think a big reason for exploding the old world was to introduce the Stormcast Eternals. A lot of people have made "Sigmarines" jokes, since they share a role and paint scheme with 40k's Ultramarines, and the comparaison is accurate. The Stormcast are a moderately elite faction that fills the role of jack of all trades. And like the Ultramarines, they fill the role of "the good guys" that can do all aspects of play - magic, melee, shooting - moderately well. That said, I do agree GW made some errors when exploding everything - I would have had more known characters survive the change, for one. And I would have made a "normal humans" army with a battletome to replace the Bretonians. I think they badly misread things by not using points, which has since been fixed with the Generals Handbook(s). I also feel like some of the non-battletome armies are in a bit of a rough spot. I think any new edition is always a combination of new ideas and looking at player feedback and seeing what doesnt work, or what isn't fun, and fixing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperHappyTime Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 2 hours ago, Corvak said: If the lore ever got too unwieldy, and models stop selling, theyll just do what they did to WHFB again. Personally, I think the design team has put the game on a better foundation that prevents that from happening - or at least gives them the freedom to change without needing the complete nuclear option again. The issue with the World that Was, is that it was finite - the factions and areas were well mapped out, and a lot of potential doors were closed to GW by their own writing. In 40k and the mortal realms, there is a lot of empty space for players to fill in themselves, and ways to introduce new armies. In 40k, you've got an unlimited number of planets. On the Mortal Realms, you get points of interest and important cities, and a lot of gray areas that can be filled in with...anything, really. Stormcast Eternals painted to look like stone, red ironjaws, all the creative hobby stuff players want, without someone pointing out their paint scheme is not canon or whatever. I also think a big reason for exploding the old world was to introduce the Stormcast Eternals. A lot of people have made "Sigmarines" jokes, since they share a role and paint scheme with 40k's Ultramarines, and the comparaison is accurate. The Stormcast are a moderately elite faction that fills the role of jack of all trades. And like the Ultramarines, they fill the role of "the good guys" that can do all aspects of play - magic, melee, shooting - moderately well. That said, I do agree GW made some errors when exploding everything - I would have had more known characters survive the change, for one. And I would have made a "normal humans" army with a battletome to replace the Bretonians. I think they badly misread things by not using points, which has since been fixed with the Generals Handbook(s). I also feel like some of the non-battletome armies are in a bit of a rough spot. I think any new edition is always a combination of new ideas and looking at player feedback and seeing what doesnt work, or what isn't fun, and fixing it. It wasn’t as explored as you would expect. What probably happened was that sales stagnated. That’s usually the point in games at which if you didn’t have an alternative, it’s already too late. Looking at everything from the latest release, if they had had all of this at launch, the game would not have had the launch failure that it did. But I think they needed to start from square 0 again to get back to Square 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overread Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 Personally I think Lord of the Rings stole the fantasy advertising focus whilst it was around and GW let their own fantasy line suffer as a result. This was also during the Kirby era when the companies focus was different. Near the end I think that GW's long term plan then was to basically get rid of most of fantasy and then steadily just make it a boutique line of miniatures. You can see that in the way they axed Tomb Kings randomly (I suspect that they were not the worst selling army but simply the first in line for the chop) and also dropped a huge number of models into direct order only. In addition they didn't release AOS 1.0 with matched play rules. IT was released with "if you've got a beard you get a +1 to your attack throw" type rules. The old fantasy could have been revived, however I think that the will wasn't there in GW to do that. It did need some big changes though; rank and file was fun but had grown on the game when it was strong; when it was in a weak position the high s tart up cost in models and money meant that many got turned away or never put together an army. The lack of a skirmish mode; the fact that the game was built around 2K points (ish) to run best etc... I also think that they decided to copy-cat 40K in more than just base type and build focus; they tried to make Sigmar very akin and gave it something fantasy had never really had; which was a poster-faction. This has worked well for GW for years; it gives htem a single force to wrap the narrative and lore around and a single faction to show up as the face of the game. Fantasy never really had that (which was oft to its benefit in rules as there wasn't a poster faction to get bias) before. OF course changing the entire game design; throwing out the rules; mostly throwing out hte old lore all at once was a bitter pill and I think showed how GW was focused on more being a boutique line of models with some rules on the side at the time. It was the extreme Kirby approach. It worked because GW threw some awesome sculpts in and removed barriers to play which got people playing and all the drama about it got even the disgruntled talking about it. It generated a lot of buzz; but for some of the wrong reasons. However GW responded well in providing the Generals Handbook and in putting the formal rules back in. Honestly I think Sigmar 2.0 is what Sigmar 1.0 should have been and in the way its getting attention and how GW has put a lot of the core starting lore into the rule book I think GW is treating it like the 1.0 it should have been (or treating 1.0 like hte beta test). I think right now Sigmar is in a very strong position and should grow; heck even Forgeworld are now putting together a team to make new sculpts for Sigmar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaleb Daark Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 they're doing it right this time around. The biggest issue with fantasy was that every edition the army book and lore just got retconned. Here we're seeing the worlds grow and the stories grow. Its genuinely alive. If brets or TK's ever came back for instance the writers would weave a story around their return, like malign portents there would be build up and anticipation, and like the idoneth a very good solid reason in the lore why we've not seen them till now. If that was fantasy you would have just had them shoved down your throat and told to just accept them, they were always here. 6 hours ago, Overread said: .. Kirby era when the companies focus was different. Honestly I think Sigmar 2.0 is what Sigmar 1.0 should have been and in the way its getting attention and how GW has put a lot of the core starting lore into the rule book I think GW is treating it like the 1.0 it should have been (or treating 1.0 like hte beta test). I think right now Sigmar is in a very strong position and should grow; heck even Forgeworld are now putting together a team to make new sculpts for Sigmar. I genuinely think that if Rowntree had been on the golden throne two years earlier we'd have had a release build up like 40k an we'd have all embraced it with open arms. Don't forget FW minis and rules weren't even allowed in warhammer world events for fantasy till the very last two events they did. Also, now we're seeing like 40k some sense in the models. A box is a unit. before we had to fill out 25% of the army in core (battleline equivalent). If you were a goblin or skaven player that was eyewatering as you were fielding 50 or more of them, as a your goblins or slaves came in boxes of 10, and you'd be buying five to ten to fulfill your minimum core tax. But that was then and this is now. AoS is all about the narrative and the miniatures - all the while we have these evolving as imaginatively and diversley as they are now we're all in a good place. Look at the realm of death, from a flat endless plain it's now a plane revolving around its core - the map has been redrawn. Our next big one is the freeing of slaanesh I think, and if malign portents is anything to go by, its' going to be great, and your last line says it all really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grungolah Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 Clearly, it will be the Endier of Times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Overread Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 @Kaleb Daark agreed, though Kirby gets all the flak I'm sure it wasn't just him alone; but yes the new management is taking GW in a much better direction. Sigmar 1.0 felt like a panic reaction, Sigmar 2.0 feels like a major release of something to get involved with that's going to great and new places! I also like the Endless Spell concept and really hope 40K doesn't adapt it as I think it gives fantasy something to stand it apart and a unique flavour. And yes I'm really hoping for a big Slannesh release - I don't know if they'd re-do the basic troops, but at the very least a new Keeper of Secrets and Beast would be great (even though I've got 9 of them in metal already). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloodmaster Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 On 6/30/2018 at 1:19 AM, Wraith01 said: This type of game is never "finished". THIS. Much rather than IF AoS will ever be "Finished", both rule wise and the narrative, it should be asked why we really have to discuss such a nonsensical topic - and why the OP doesn't engage at least once after the initial post of a slightly silly and irrelevant question of which THE ONLY answer is: when GW goes out and/or AoS doesn't make sufficient profit anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thebiggesthat Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 If you aren't constantly finessing and balancing you aren't doing the right thing. We've had 'finished' editions of war-games in the past. It deteriorates into the haves and have nots, lots of comping to cope with the broken stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeneralZero Posted July 2, 2018 Share Posted July 2, 2018 sooooooooooooooooooon (trademark of several companies especially Blizzard) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.