Jump to content

The Rumour Thread


Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, Grimrock said:

I think the biggest thing that worries me with the shadespire video game is how they talked about the warbands. They said they'd start with a few and then release more in updates later, which makes it sound like you'll have to pay for the subsequent releases. That works well enough for miniatures but I'm not looking to get nickle and dimed every time they release a new warband for a video game. If it's something like 20 bucks a season then maybe, but even then I don't think it would bode well for the widespread popularity of the game. 

They said that at full release you will have 4 warbands for free. Additional warbands will be DLC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Morglum StormBasha said:

Gutbusters are definitley coming similarly to skaven and fec in size of update 

Uh oh. I’m worried that gutbusters will just get a terrain piece and endless Spells and nothing else... :/

Still excited for the 3 seminar previews this month. 

In terms of 40K, it seems super active in terms of rumors (Primaris only codex, either imperial fists or dark angels Primarch+codex)

for AOS, if sylvaneth are coming (as per the rumors), it might be to finish up Loomcurse and Sylvaneth before the previews (Warhammer fest, etc.), as it seems that the previews then would be a different battletome. So far rumors have been extremely quiet, so the most we can hope for is sylvaneth next week. 

Warcry is almost definitely coming out in June (Summer 2019), at Warhammer Fest we’ll probably just see a few warbands. 

There will likely be 1 “new-ish” faction, and 1 updated faction revealed at warcry, along with whatever forbidden power and that paint release will be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, calcysimon said:

What I really hope to see In a gloomspite vs sylvaneth box is a new warboss on squig since the last model right now is out of place

Right, another thing I was thinking about. I feel like the sylvaneth terrain piece might just be a wyldwood, except resculpted, and sold in a set of 3, like the Skaven Gnawhole. I feel like GW will purposely change the rules so that you don’t need so many wyldwoods, after i noticed the new Fyreslayers lists have changed a LOT (from 120 models in a list down to 50), so I feel like GW May do this just to reduce cost of entry? I dunno, just a wild guess

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, strugglewithin1 said:

Thinking about it, maybe Gaz is right about timing. Maybe it was an easy box to spot?, that's why 4 different people bought me one!

Wow! That's really cool you got four! Must be well thought of :D 

I mentioned to my wife I would have liked this, but as they looked like dinosaurs to her, I ended up with the Seraphon set :D 

1 hour ago, Grimrock said:

I think the biggest thing that worries me with the shadespire video game is how they talked about the warbands. They said they'd start with a few and then release more in updates later, which makes it sound like you'll have to pay for the subsequent releases. That works well enough for miniatures but I'm not looking to get nickle and dimed every time they release a new warband for a video game. If it's something like 20 bucks a season then maybe, but even then I don't think it would bode well for the widespread popularity of the game. 

I'm expecting DLC and have no issue with that. For me it's all about getting the pricing right or doing a season pass or something. I'm sure it's something they have thought about..... O.o

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Gaz Taylor said:

I'm expecting DLC and have no issue with that. For me it's all about getting the pricing right or doing a season pass or something. I'm sure it's something they have thought about..... O.o

 

If its anything like the Blood Bowl games it will be fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, King Taloren said:

I think the timing was GW trying to have something besides Army Collection boxes for the Holiday Season something else to hopefully get some snags from shoppers looking to gift their WH playing relations.

the thing is that they really delayed the Wraith and Rapture box preorder until the week of Christmas where majority of people had already finish their shopping, which I found really strange

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, novakai said:

the thing is that they really delayed the Wraith and Rapture box preorder until the week of Christmas where majority of people had already finish their shopping, which I found really strange

Could have been a production issue that came up. Probably was intended for Christmas sales and then delays happened and they had already hyped the release so just went ahead and released 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gaz Taylor said:

I'm expecting DLC and have no issue with that. For me it's all about getting the pricing right or doing a season pass or something. I'm sure it's something they have thought about..... O.o

 

For sure, if they do it right then it's no problem. I think I'm just paranoid mostly... Transitioning physical media into video games has a rocky history and the dlc culture doesn't help at all. I hope I'm pleasently surprised though. Shadespire is a perfect fit into my favourite kind of video game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Kaz said:

In terms of 40K, it seems super active in terms of rumors (Primaris only codex, either imperial fists or dark angels Primarch+codex) 

I keep seeing those rumours, where are those from a'd do you have a source please? Just curious :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Zanzou said:

The problem with games workshop is they only think of what's the best immediate return on investment, and they almost NEVER make decisions based on the overall health of the game.  (Leaving armies unfinished while releasing new ones for years upon years, removing support for many models some of which were brand new in comparison to the ancient metal ones they still sell, etc.)

I disagree with this, I think they clearly have a long-term strategy in mind. The issue is that they do have to mix in New splash releases with the old releases, so that they can maintain YoY growth. I think the updates to 2ed tomes so far demonstrate that they have thought this through with a multi-year plan.  For instance, updating a perceived unpopular army like Fyreslayers, may not be an immediate return on investment, so they have to hedge these bets with new releases like Slaanesh.

 

As for the Rumor, I can believe most of it. If the new boxset is Sylvaneth vs Gloomspite, then it only makes sense that Sylvaneth would be getting a release a la FEC/Skaven.   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Zanzou said:

The problem with games workshop is they only think of what's the best immediate return on investment, and they almost NEVER make decisions based on the overall health of the game.  (Leaving armies unfinished while releasing new ones for years upon years, removing support for many models some of which were brand new in comparison to the ancient metal ones they still sell, etc.)

This is very old GW thinking. 

Imbquite sure they are more focused on the overall health of the game. The move to 2.0 is still transitioning because they had to get all the 40k armies updated to 8th edition before they could shift focus on Sigmar for expansion. Like it or not we are always second fiddle to the sci-fi child of grimdark. Excepting Sisters of Battle, 40k is done with the codex books and now we can have our time for every army to update. Let them get everyone on the same page first so all armies are 2.0 compatible and then we’ll can start complaining about how xyz army needs new a new line of models.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget that fantasy got left behind for a long while prior to AoS. Partly I think because GW picked up the huge Lord of the Rings deal and wound up with two games in a similar sort of market and thus one took the high road and one got left behind; it didn't help when the bubble burst and GW (who had never done movie -tie-in products before) were just not prepared for the sudden drop in sales. 

So there were some rough times and it explains why armies ilke skaven - clearly big popular armies - were left without revised models. Heck a lot of the plastics are quite old now too. GW doesn't have the resources to push out Gloomspite releases for every army so we have some with lots, some with some and some with the bare bones release. Come the end of 2019 I figure most armies will have Battletomes. In fact I'd wager we'll see every non-Order Alliance fully equipped with Battletomes and most of Order sorted out. 

That puts the game in a super strong position for GW to balance with the Generals Handbook 2020; to further add features and udpate the game and able to add to factions. In addition it makes it really easy for us to get new people into the game because they can go to the GW website and easily see what to get to get an army up and running or they can browse the extensive store copies of Battletomes and see each army represented. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, King Taloren said:

This is very old GW thinking. 

Imbquite sure they are more focused on the overall health of the game. The move to 2.0 is still transitioning because they had to get all the 40k armies updated to 8th edition before they could shift focus on Sigmar for expansion. Like it or not we are always second fiddle to the sci-fi child of grimdark. Excepting Sisters of Battle, 40k is done with the codex books and now we can have our time for every army to update. Let them get everyone on the same page first so all armies are 2.0 compatible and then we’ll can start complaining about how xyz army needs new a new line of models.

The problem is that they were pushing to new expansions/versions of AoS as you say (2.0) before bothering to support nearly half their range in 1.0 or 2.0.  It's all about money.   A healthy game would have one complete supported version of their game before pushing onto other things. Investing a year to update the rules so that EVERYONE who owns armies with Age of Sigmar is working with the same ruleset is simply a no-brainer. Everyone would be on equal footing, everyone would be having fun.  However that wouldn't be immediate profit-making so they invested their resources elsewhere.  I am not even talking about models here, I am talking about warscrolls, points, proper allegiances, proper allies, battletomes, etc.  Removing warscrolls from new models like Poisoned Wind Mortar team because they had released them twice on mixed sprue boxes is another thing that would only be done by a company prioritizing money.  It would be one thing to cease production of those models but to even remove the warscroll for it, despite releasing it in a "AoS" boxset?  That's just scummy, saying "buy our other stuff if you want to play properly".

The mixed quality of the actual outdated models themselves is a separate issue, but still an issue.

Edited by Zanzou
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

someone said earlier about Soulblight being very unlikely as Death already got their book with Flesh-Eaters. the problem with that is the announcement of battletomes for each alliance was made after flesh-eaters was already announced, and they didnt say each alliance was only getting 1 book

aside from a completely new faction, i think Soulblight is the most likely Death faction to get its own book seperate from Legions of Nagash and new models (on that note, i really hope they DONT allow the new Soulblight stuff into Legions of Nagash. as it is, in the next Generals Handbook i fear Nighthaught armies will be punished for the sins of Nagash and i really dont want that to repeat with Soulblight)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd be very surprised if it was only 1 book per alliance.  I mean, in death's case that might be true since they have so few factions, but we're already at 3 chaos books, 1 death book, 1 destruction book, and 1 order book this year.  So unless there's no more books coming at all in the next 8 months, I'd wager at least 3 of the alliances get more than 1 book this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
8
42 minutes ago, Zanzou said:

The problem is that they were pushing to new expansions/versions of AoS as you say (2.0) before bothering to support nearly half their range in 1.0 or 2.0.  It's all about money.   A healthy game would have one complete supported version of their game before pushing onto other things. Investing a year to update the rules so that EVERYONE who owns armies with Age of Sigmar is working with the same ruleset is simply a no-brainer. Everyone would be on equal footing, everyone would be having fun.  However that wouldn't be immediate profit-making so they invested their resources elsewhere.  I am not even talking about models here, I am talking about warscrolls, points, proper allegiances, proper allies, battletomes, etc.  Removing warscrolls from new models like Poisoned Wind Mortar team because they had released them twice on mixed sprue boxes is another thing that would only be done by a company prioritizing money.  It would be one thing to cease production of those models but to even remove the warscroll for it, despite releasing it in a "AoS" boxset?  That's just scummy, saying "buy our other stuff if you want to play properly".

The mixed quality of the actual outdated models themselves is a separate issue, but still an issue.

First. GW is a public company. Their first obligation is to the shareholders that own the company. Not you as a player. 
Second. GW is a miniatures company that writes rules for the miniatures. Not the other way around. 
Third, you are contradicting yourself about Poisoned Wind Mortar. The plastic model was on a shared sprue,  That's how they get the cost for starter sets down, cram it onto as few sprues as possible.  So the miniature can't be made anymore.  So it's UNHEALTHY for the game itself to allow people to play with miniatures that aren't readily available by everyone. If you care about the health of the gaming aspect of it, then you can surely appreciate this new and recent push for "only stuff we currently sell goes in the battletome, and the warscroll matches what comes in the box(stormfiends)". It's not a greedy evil scheme, it is literally for the best. 



 

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Zanzou Actually GW for years hasn't updated all its armies to each edition. In fact its only AoS 2.0 and 40K's current (I think its 8th edition) which have done this recently. Prior to the big management shake-up armies would miss editions and could take months upon months to get new codex/battletomes. Of course back then each one was a major release so it was a huge glut of models at the same time. 

Thing was some armies could skip two whole editions - Dark Eldar and Necrons were in really bad shape and Sisters of Battle have missed a few too. 

 

It's only recently that GW has changed its focus. 

 

Also don't forget AoS at launch was without rules - we then got a fast 0.5 version with the Generals Handbook which was basically a kneejerk reaction to getting some rules adn points out because whilst AoS was selling it was tanking and getting a lot of flack. AoS 1.0 was not so much rushed as it was just not as fully fleshed out; the army books were just warscrolls with no real abilities or flavour to them. Again 1.0 was a fast repair job as AoS was going through big changes as a product as was GW itself.

2.0 marked a proper rules system with proper fleshed out Battletomes. IT makes far more sense to support that than what were essentially interim products of the 0.5 and 1.0 rules. And GW are on the ball now, by the end of 2019 (this year) we should see most armies fleshed out with a Tome.

I'd wager Chaos will be 100% done (there's only Tzeentch and Slaves/Everchosen to go and both of them can be small releases - tome/spells/terrain. 
Death is already done
Destruction can be done in only 4 tomes, but possibly less as there's a very high chance Gutbusters and Beastclaws are going to be merged into an Ogors Battletome and Orruks might well get merged into one as well. 
Order is more messy and might well make it to the end of the year without being fully done, but if GW keep the current pace it will be close and going into 2020 it will finish up pretty fast. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Joseph Mackay said:

someone said earlier about Soulblight being very unlikely as Death already got their book with Flesh-Eaters. the problem with that is the announcement of battletomes for each alliance was made after flesh-eaters was already announced, and they didnt say each alliance was only getting 1 book

aside from a completely new faction, i think Soulblight is the most likely Death faction to get its own book seperate from Legions of Nagash and new models (on that note, i really hope they DONT allow the new Soulblight stuff into Legions of Nagash. as it is, in the next Generals Handbook i fear Nighthaught armies will be punished for the sins of Nagash and i really dont want that to repeat with Soulblight)

I feel like any new death tome that come out would require it to be a somewhat big release, Soulblight in particular would require a lot of rework  like plastic Bloodknights, Plastic Vampire hero, and other stuff to make it an actual army. Deathrattle may have a chance because they have a bit more in the range and because weird state the Sepulchral Guard are in currently. still unless GW has been working on Death stuff during this time, flesh-eater could be the only death release this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, sorokyl said:

 

First. GW is a public company. Their first obligation is to the shareholders that own the company. Not you as a player. 
Second. GW is a miniatures company that writes rules for the miniatures. Not the other way around. 
Third, you are contradicting yourself about Poisoned Wind Mortar. The plastic model was on a shared sprue,  That's how they get the cost for starter sets down, cram it onto as few sprues as possible.  So the miniature can't be made anymore.  So it's UNHEALTHY for the game itself to allow people to play with miniatures that aren't readily available by everyone. If you care about the health of the gaming aspect of it, then you can surely appreciate this new and recent push for "only stuff we currently sell goes in the battletome, and the warscroll matches what comes in the box(stormfiends)". It's not a greedy evil scheme, it is literally for the best. 



 

First.  I know GW is a company, actually that was my entire point.  Money is the objective.  What's the problem?

Second.  No objections here -> They write rules for their miniatures as you said.

Third.  Wrong, I 100% disagree.   It was GW's own choice to re-release those "AGE OF SIGMAR" models on shared sprues. The miniatures could still be made, but if they decided they couldn't "afford" to upkeep the model with a shared sprue and they actually cared about the health of the game, they either have to support what they sold or else they should never have released something for "AGE OF SIGMAR" that they would have to pull the rules for and stop producing.  GW wanted to profit from their plastic crack without having to do any of the support work for it.

47 minutes ago, Overread said:

@Zanzou Actually GW for years hasn't updated all its armies to each edition. In fact its only AoS 2.0 and 40K's current (I think its 8th edition) which have done this recently. Prior to the big management shake-up armies would miss editions and could take months upon months to get new codex/battletomes. Of course back then each one was a major release so it was a huge glut of models at the same time. 

Thing was some armies could skip two whole editions - Dark Eldar and Necrons were in really bad shape and Sisters of Battle have missed a few too. 

 

It's only recently that GW has changed its focus. 

 

Also don't forget AoS at launch was without rules - we then got a fast 0.5 version with the Generals Handbook which was basically a kneejerk reaction to getting some rules adn points out because whilst AoS was selling it was tanking and getting a lot of flack. AoS 1.0 was not so much rushed as it was just not as fully fleshed out; the army books were just warscrolls with no real abilities or flavour to them. Again 1.0 was a fast repair job as AoS was going through big changes as a product as was GW itself.

2.0 marked a proper rules system with proper fleshed out Battletomes. IT makes far more sense to support that than what were essentially interim products of the 0.5 and 1.0 rules. And GW are on the ball now, by the end of 2019 (this year) we should see most armies fleshed out with a Tome.

I'd wager Chaos will be 100% done (there's only Tzeentch and Slaves/Everchosen to go and both of them can be small releases - tome/spells/terrain. 
Death is already done
Destruction can be done in only 4 tomes, but possibly less as there's a very high chance Gutbusters and Beastclaws are going to be merged into an Ogors Battletome and Orruks might well get merged into one as well. 
Order is more messy and might well make it to the end of the year without being fully done, but if GW keep the current pace it will be close and going into 2020 it will finish up pretty fast. 

I appreciate  the amount of info you provided with your points. As for your first point though, that just means GW is guilty of what I've been claiming for years.

I think it's disingenuous to suggest that for a healthy game GW was fine to only start supporting all of the armies post 2.0.  You are assuming that GW is going to stick with the 2.0 rules so it's ok if armies are behind and they only start to play catch up now.  Seeing GWs track record as you have explained so far, they are more likely to go ahead with AoS 3.0 before making sure all of their "AoS" armies are on even footing.  There is no end to it unless GW finally starts investing their resources towards SUPPORT in existing products instead of rushing ahead to sell new things.

Edited by Zanzou
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

another Death Battletome is coming this year though, that announcement was made after Flesh-Eaters.

i know they said the images are not indicative of which armies are coming, however i believe that was a lie. Soulblight for Death and Ogors for Destruction (as well as updated Ironjawz and/or Bonsplittaz). Slaves To Darkness/Everchosen for Chaos i suspect is also coming

im actually going to take a wild guess and say that old books updated to 2.0 are not counted for the 'at least 1 Battletome for each Grand Alliance' in which case my guesses are
-Order: Disspossessed or one of the other Aelves (Light or Dark)
-Chaos: Slaves To Darkness/Everchosen
-Death: Soulblight or a brand new faction
-Destruction: Ogors. combined book of Gutbusters and Beastclaw Raiders

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
 
 
2
3 minutes ago, Zanzou said:

Third.  Wrong.   It was GW's own choice to re-release those "AGE OF SIGMAR" models on shared sprues. The miniatures could still be made, but if they decided they couldn't "afford" to upkeep the model with a shared sprue and they actually cared about the health of the game, they either have to support what they sold or else they should never have released something for "AGE OF SIGMAR" that they would have to pull the rules for and stop producing.  GW wanted to profit from their plastic crack without having to do any of the support work for it.

They also sold Greenskinz, Gitmob, etc during the AoS timeframe. So what? There is no rule that "Anything sold under the  AoS shall forever be supported".  We will lose many more models / warscrolls over time.   
Are you suggesting that GW just keep updating the miniatures for every unit currently in the GHB? That's really boring. I'd rather see new armies, new models, and understand that unfortunately, we will lose some over time.  From a competitive players perspective, it's the cost of playing a game. the rules change.   From a casual players perspective, I think it's great that they continue to offer free rules via warhammer legends, etc.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, sorokyl said:

They also sold Greenskinz, Gitmob, etc during the AoS timeframe. So what? There is no rule that "Anything sold under the  AoS shall forever be supported".  We will lose many more models / warscrolls over time.   
Are you suggesting that GW just keep updating the miniatures for every unit currently in the GHB? That's really boring. I'd rather see new armies, new models, and understand that unfortunately, we will lose some over time.  From a competitive players perspective, it's the cost of playing a game. the rules change.   From a casual players perspective, I think it's great that they continue to offer free rules via warhammer legends, etc.  

Nothing "forever".  Anything released with the "Age of Sigmar" series of warhammer should be supported throughout "Age of Sigmar", end of story.   As a customer buying "Age of Sigmar" models it is a completely reasonable expectation that they are actually playable in Age of Sigmar games.  The Poisoned Wind Mortar Weapon team doesn't even have a warscroll now , so they failed anyone who bought it with that expectation.  

You do realize that merely keeping their "Age of Sigmar" models doesn't REQUIRE them to never release new models, right?  A growing company could easily take their earnings and invest in expanding their range.  The problem is that wouldn't be as easy money as throwing out their last sprues (and rules)and pop in next year's quick sell.

EDIT: My main point is still about supporting their age of sigmar warscrolls, older models in their inventory aside.

Edited by Zanzou
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...