The Rumour Thread

[Nos]

2 hours ago, Overread said:

We know the first half of 2018 was going to be 40K heavy because GW said they'd release ALL codex within a year or so, clearly  this is going to overshoot some. That said 2019 really needs to be a strong year for Sigmar now that 2.0 is out and GW really needs to build on the power of that launch.

They posted their highest sales year in history last year. They very much know what they're doing, I wouldn't worry about them not realising the potential of one of their products at this point. A year since Dark Imperium the overwhelming majority of armies have new army books, that's insane by any previous editions standards. Many armies would go through an entire edition without even getting up to code. Hell even Malign Portents which was basically the epilogue to AOS 1 was very well served by products and as a hobby event.

To be honest the 40k Fantasy comparison is kind of weird anyway. There's this notion that there should be equality between them, an even 50:50 split. While this makes sense from a purely abstract notion of fairness, GW has never said it will support both precisely at the same ratio. Moreover the player base globally definitively isn't equal either. So given that the expectancy that both systems be equally as served as each other doesn't actually make much contextual sense.

Edited August 19, 2018 by Nos

[DanielFM]

39 minutes ago, Nos said:

So given that the expectancy that both systems be equally as served as each other doesn't actually make much contextual sense.

Why not?

You don't get one of the systems to be as popular as the other by supportingly it less, but the other way around. If GW wants AoS to be as popular as 40k (and why wouldn't?) they should invest extra on it.

Having Warhammer Fest be Warhammer 40k Fest doesn't appear to be the best way to promote AoS.

Will NOVA sort this out? Hopefully, but there is no guarantee.

How did GW think a single Endless Spell would be enough to get AoS players hyped, I can't really understand.

[Chikout]

I think people need to get some perspective. GW never released more than 5 fantasy army book in a single year and quite often just 2 or 3. This is year is already tied with 2016 for the most battletomes in a single year at 6. We have also had a new rule book, 3 starter sets, a narrative supplement,  a big magic supplement and a global campaign not to mention 50 free short stories and the generals handbook. 

Back in the day GW would release a rule book one month, a starter set the next, and each army book would get a month to itself as would the magic supplement. So we have had 5 months worth of releases in two.

Personally I think we have just had the best 8 months for fantasy of any kind. Another battletome in the autumn would just be icing on the cake.

[Kugane]

57 minutes ago, DanielFM said:

Why not?

You don't get one of the systems to be as popular as the other by supportingly it less, but the other way around. If GW wants AoS to be as popular as 40k (and why wouldn't?) they should invest extra on it.

Having Warhammer Fest be Warhammer 40k Fest doesn't appear to be the best way to promote AoS.

Will NOVA sort this out? Hopefully, but there is no guarantee.

How did GW think a single Endless Spell would be enough to get AoS players hyped, I can't really understand.

I think they went with a less = more approach and riding the wave of hype by just showing the bull, hoping people will get crazy about a new faction release like they did with Idoneth Deepkin and such. Instead the hype kind of fell flat on its face and from what I can tell, people aren't waiting for ANOTHER new faction, but would rather have their existing armies updated.

I think that bull would be far more appreciated if they had shown it with some other simple product like: Coming this Orktober! Battletome: Greenskins or Battletome: Destruction.

One book reveal would have made lots of people happy I think, even if there are no new models involved.

Edited August 19, 2018 by Kugane

[Aeryenn]

If I am to guess they're going the same way video games do.

USA game show - best content, most anticipated premieres

Europe game show - leftovers, small content

Look: E3 vs Gamescom

It was their FIRST Warhammer Fest in Europe. It should have been a blast. It wasn't. 

[blueshirtman]

4 hours ago, Overread said:

We know the first half of 2018 was going to be 40K heavy because GW said they'd release ALL codex within a year or so, clearly  this is going to overshoot some. That said 2019 really needs to be a strong year for Sigmar now that 2.0 is out and GW really needs to build on the power of that launch.

puting a new edition out and then giving it 0 support for 6 months seems crazy. Meta stagnets after a month of two, what does GW expect people to do if thee army that they have or want to start isn't the top 3 right now? Wait, and hope that next year there is going to be new stuff, is techniclly an option, but you would have to be sure that it is your faction that is going to be updated first. If not you could be looking at a year or more of no updates

 

57 minutes ago, Chikout said:

I think people need to get some perspective. GW never released more than 5 fantasy army book in a single year and quite often just 2 or 3. This is year is already tied with 2016 for the most battletomes in a single year at 6.

So because GW did something really bad in the past, now that it does something bad, it is ok? Doesn't seem like a good argument in favor of such game design to me. Plus it is only effective on people that played in those days. If someone started in AoS 1st edition or wants to start right now, it doesn't help those people much.

Quote

We have also had a new rule book, 3 starter sets, a narrative supplement,  a big magic supplement and a global campaign not to mention 50 free short stories and the generals handbook. 

Cool, so if your army has no wizards and narrative is not the dominate way to play, what did your army get in form of fixs in the new edition? Stories don't help a bad army get better, plus am not even sure BCR actually had any stories about them durning the campaign.

[Craptrain]

People, some perspective here please.  We literally just finished the wave of releases for SCE and Nighthaunt.  So yeah, there were no huge reveals at Warhammer Fest, but that doesn't mean there won't be any at Nova or that there's nothing on the horizon for AoS.  As someone who plays both 40k and AoS, I have been beyond happy with how the past year of releases has gone.

Exercise a little patience and realize that GW has multiple systems and armies to support other than your specific one or two.

[Ragnar Alpaca]

This has been a lot of complaining, calm done everyone we will get more stuff soon. Honestly I like AoS better than 40k but I was starting to think AoS was getting covered too much. If you leave out Adeptus Titanicus, because that’s a whole mess, nothing has been released that’s big for 40k in a while. 

Also I would love AoS to hold back for a while and catch up everything they already have, stop releasing new armies and models and release battletomes for the rest of the factions and clean some of the smaller ones up.

[pseudonyme]

Let’s assume GW decided that we were not ready for too much grots. This postponed reveal is a way for them to prevent us from having a heart attack. We should thank them.

[Barkanaut]

40k barely got any love this year compared to AoS. I remember years back when AoS barely ever got any support in a year. This year has been simply fantastic for AoS and has seen the game grow by leaps and bounds. Also believe it or not there are tons of people on the sidelines waiting to start AoS with new armies. I know people are looking forward to updates Sepharon, Skaven, Light elves, dark elves, and gobbo's big time. I would say these are the last five big requests too until the armies are at a healthy amount. Maybe one more new and specific AoS one would not go amiss either. Still I think its about time we start looking to begin updating the first armies they made like Fyre and Ironjaws because they are so small. KO also need updates because they don't really work in AoS 2.0 all that well either. 

Even if we have to wait until next year to get stuff that's fine by me. It will have been the best year for AoS in ages. 

Edited August 19, 2018 by Barkanaut

[Kramer]

1 hour ago, blueshirtman said:

because GW did something really bad in the past, now that it does something bad, it is ok? Doesn't seem like a good argument in favor of such game design to me. Plus it is only effective on people that played in those days. If someone started in AoS 1st edition or wants to start right now, it doesn't help those people much

They didn’t do bad then. They did the best possible! Maybe more just isn’t

a. Possible

B. Commercially sound

C. Possible to balance.

And I could easily go past K possibly Z. They are still doing their best. 

Yes it’s easier for people playing in the 90’s as it’s a vast improvement. But you don’t want something new every week. Not really. Never forget it’s a 1st world problem we are disappointed about regarding a to slow* release schedule.

* which is pretty effig fast you. For the gamers. You don’t want a Witcher every month. For the car enthusiasts not every release is gonna be a 911. And for the sports people not every team is going to be a champion every year. But we’ll always cheer and enjoy their successs  

Edited August 19, 2018 by Kramer

[Yokai]

3 hours ago, DanielFM said:

How did GW think a single Endless Spell would be enough to get AoS players hyped, I can't really understand.

I disagree. Personally, I was delightfully surprised with the mysterious endless spell revealed and want to know more as soon as possible. That's hype enough for me.

What fun is there to be had when all is developing exactly as expected? ?

[GeneralZero]

BTW,  Warhammer comunity announced the new Middle earth starter set. A nice box. But I don't know this game: how would you compage it to AoS? Strategicaly speaking (not lore, not miniature) i.e. about the rules gameplay and system.

[Kugane]

2 hours ago, blueshirtman said:

puting a new edition out and then giving it 0 support for 6 months seems crazy. Meta stagnets after a month of two, what does GW expect people to do if thee army that they have or want to start isn't the top 3 right now? Wait, and hope that next year there is going to be new stuff, is techniclly an option, but you would have to be sure that it is your faction that is going to be updated first. If not you could be looking at a year or more of no updates

 

So because GW did something really bad in the past, now that it does something bad, it is ok? Doesn't seem like a good argument in favor of such game design to me. Plus it is only effective on people that played in those days. If someone started in AoS 1st edition or wants to start right now, it doesn't help those people much.

Cool, so if your army has no wizards and narrative is not the dominate way to play, what did your army get in form of fixs in the new edition? Stories don't help a bad army get better, plus am not even sure BCR actually had any stories about them durning the campaign.

The support thing is surely something that could be fixed through digital updates. I think even stuff like the warhammer legends stuff would be better focused on putting out tournament legal compendiums for armies and giving them some battalions and allegiance abilities to work with.

Also, there will always be a top 3 list that looks very similar time and time again. Some armies are just statistically more likely to win, sadly. GW's main focus doesn't seem to be towards balance either.

From what I've heard, only a small portion of the people that buy their products actually play the game, and an even smaller portion plays competitively. So, lets say if 5% of all their buyers are competitive players, its still a very small group and likely not their main target group they would want to cater to the most. We are a minority in this sadly.

I do think however, it would be better if they stopped changing the rules so much and balanced the game as-is. Each time battalions or warscrolls get removed its 1 step forward and 3 steps back in my opinion.

 

 

[Kugane]

6 minutes ago, GeneralZero said:

BTW,  Warhammer comunity announced the new Middle earth starter set. A nice box. But I don't know this game: how would you compage it to AoS? Strategicaly speaking (not lore, not miniature) i.e. about the rules gameplay and system.

Its a remake of the LOTR strategy game of 15 years ago as far as I was told. You can probably find out lots of info looking for that.

[michu]

@GeneralZero It has alternate activation and use smaller number of miniatures (you can play bigger battles too). And it's considered more balanced than any other GW game.

[Kramer]

6 minutes ago, Kugane said:

The support thing is surely something that could be fixed through digital updates. I think even stuff like the warhammer legends stuff would be better focused on putting out tournament legal compendiums for armies and giving them some battalions and allegiance abilities to work with.

Also, there will always be a top 3 list that looks very similar time and time again. Some armies are just statistically more likely to win, sadly. GW's main focus doesn't seem to be towards balance either.

From what I've heard, only a small portion of the people that buy their products actually play the game, and an even smaller portion plays competitively. So, lets say if 5% of all their buyers are competitive players, its still a very small group and likely not their main target group they would want to cater to the most. We are a minority in this sadly.

I do think however, it would be better if they stopped changing the rules so much and balanced the game as-is. Each time battalions or warscrolls get removed its 1 step forward and 3 steps back in my opinion.

 

 

Nope and thank God/khorne/Sigmar/insert preference here  else we’ll end up with chess for balance! (And both teams playing black) 

[Kugane]

3 minutes ago, Kramer said:

Nope and thank God/khorne/Sigmar/insert preference here  else we’ll end up with chess for balance! (And both teams playing black) 

I did not mean that type of balance where everybody has everything, it'll just become boring if so. I meant it more as a rock/paper/scissors, except there are like 15 other elements which beat 2 out of 3 in various fashions. A game in which each army has strong matchups and weak matchups, as well as each army having different playstyles which can counter certain armies, but totally fail against others. Similar to magic the gathering has various types of decks which can be very weak against certain type of decks, but shine against others and at the same time having a large variety of objectives in which even weaker armies can shine if played properly.

[Nos]

5 hours ago, DanielFM said:

Why not?

You don't get one of the systems to be as popular as the other by supportingly it less, but the other way around. If GW wants AoS to be as popular as 40k (and why wouldn't?) they should invest extra on it.

Having Warhammer Fest be Warhammer 40k Fest doesn't appear to be the best way to promote AoS.

Will NOVA sort this out? Hopefully, but there is no guarantee.

How did GW think a single Endless Spell would be enough to get AoS players hyped, I can't really understand.

A) GW is a business. In business, it is far more important to make plans according to capacity than aspiration. 40K has, oh, 20+ years of goodwill and currency within wider popular culture at this point, never mind just the Hobby,  on AoS, they aren't going to catch that up within 2.

But what is apparent to anyone who gives even a cursory look is that GW are working at their full capacity to support both main systems and Specialist Games and their output in all areas is frankly prodigious and all areas are doing well. And as mentioned before, they have the profits to prove it. They know what they're doing and how much to invest in each. That's just a fact currently.

B) AOS 2.0 is of course designed to attract new players but it fundamentally serves the purpose of ensuring existing players continue to invest in a a product that they can see is lively and evolving.  Anyone interested in AOS can see that that is indeed the case, and then some ,on the back of this years releases.  Theres been something every month, including three entirely new factions, a new magic system and an entirely new version of the game for starters. In the space of 6 months.

Further to that though its very apparent that GW are interested in selling AOS as a narrative product at least as much as a games system. Their releases are scheduled around story telling devices. No story ever begins introducing 20 characters at once. For that reason alone, expect to wait a while for new reveals after a certain point.  

You mention elsewhere that this dosent work for your preffered play style. Thats entirely your perogative, but it's not the demographic GW are aiming the product  at. But then that's always been the case. GW evolved as a means of using rules to play with your collection of toy soldiers and fantasy minus i.e. The fluff and the character was there first and then they added the rules so you could play with them. That's why GWs minis and fiction has been so consistently impressive-it's always been the priority. Rules are an afterthought. If you want to play skirmish games or war games there are literally dozens of systems created with balance and rules and strategy as their focus. But GW has never been invested in that side of things. The rules are a bonus to allow you to do something with your toys, that's all.

Because, and this brings the whole thing full circle, the only way to ever make AOS as popular as 40k will be if they develop it into an immersive, evolving, rich fiction like 40k.  They're not interested in selling a faction, they're interested in selling an entire world and IP. You don't do that by saying "Here are Elves this month. Here are Goblins this month." 

By taking the time to build a better more robust fiction and place faction reveals at points within that they ensure a far healthier future for and commitment to AOS than just releasing stuff bi-monthly and saying there you go have fun.

C) Not to mention that GW sell a product which requires natural time investment. To assemble, build an army and paint them to even the barest standard requires far more time than pretty much any other gaming hobby takes to complete an entire game if not several. It's not a hobby for impatient people basically.

The people willing to be patient with things are going to be GW's best customers because the hobby basically requires that. The fickle people demanding constant novelty aren't going to stick around in a hobby which dosent reward that kind of mentality so GW arent going to worry about trying to appeal to people who want that. Bottom line is those people will probably invest intensely for a short while and disappear. GW will get a nice injection of fast sales from them and then have the backbone of committed steady hobbyists to keep things at a steady pace. 

Edited August 19, 2018 by Nos

[novakai]

While I do think this year has been awesome for AoS with the edition and all the release I think GW did miss the mark when it came to not merging some of the army ranges together when 2.0 was release. it would have been pretty nice if all of a sudden your brayherd army all of a sudden had more choices with Warherd and thunderscorn, it would have made the edition more impactful with more army feeling almost up to date. so even if you have to wait years for a battletome, your army range had more stuff to work with. Patient is a virtual, but people have a limit when they feel neglected. 

[Morglum StormBasha]

1 hour ago, GeneralZero said:

BTW,  Warhammer comunity announced the new Middle earth starter set. A nice box. But I don't know this game: how would you compage it to AoS? Strategicaly speaking (not lore, not miniature) i.e. about the rules gameplay and system.

So given as I’m on my way back from aradacon a 210 player middle earth sbg event and have just played 9 games in 3 days here are some of the key differences between sbg and aos:

game size

750 points is tournament standard rather than 2000. Most games are fought on a 4 by 4 not a 6 by 4. Max model count is under 100 given current pointing.

models not units

each model matters and fights and dies on its own rather than as a unit. 

Duels not massive brawls

combat is even more about positioning than age of sigmar. Models must be in base to base to fight each other or else be armed with a spear or pike that can support through another model. Combats between models are paired off as much as possible but you position as carefully as you can to try to outnumber your opponent or even trap him at which point you are twice as likely to kill him.

heroic actions not command abilities 

each hero has his own personal store of might (think command points) that he can choose to spend at the beginning of each phase. These actions can effect him or models near him and are things like move half your speed further (powerful as there is no concept of runnings or charging in Lotr) or shooting first when your opponent has priority.

matched play 

there are 12 matched play scenarios there are similar to aos and 40k. Probably closer to 40k as often 3 victory conditions eg breaking your opponent, most models in 6 of objective and kill the warlord.

break point not battleshock

 morale is represented by models having to take courage tests before they move once more than half your army has died. So if 21 of your 40 are dead and you are Mordor you have courage 2 on your orcs and need to roll a 8 to get to 10 plus for that model not to scarper.

no turn limit

games end depending on the scenario once one force is broken or once one force is at 25 per cent of its models. In practice in my last game today we played 13 turns in 2 hours.

i go you go each phase not each turn

roll a dice for priority. If you win you move then your opponent then you shoot then your opponent does etc. Heroes can interrupt this.

new edition

new edition has been written by jay Clare who as well as being a nice chap is basically the best player in the uk. He’s added in a lot of new levels to the new edition like allegiance abilities and reworked every profile in the game. 

 

I love both systems both very tactical and very different. Much more so than say 40k vs aos.

[Enoby]

Kind of off the current topic, but I'm not sure where to put this - it was a bit of a passed rumour that seemed to amount to nothing, but came directly from GW. Did they give up on revamping the Chaos Lord on Manticore? If so, anyone hazard a guess as to why?

[Frozenbeast]

2 hours ago, Nos said:

40K has, oh, 20+ years of goodwill...

This is why I stopped answering. At some point the topic goes to "I am right you are wrong". No one here is trying to overcome the other; can I put on a ** - NON-EXISTING Mod Hat - ** (I am not a MOD?) and ask everybody to respect other people opinion without mocking and bring back down the conversation to "friendly"? ?

I can see there  is a lot of fire around the topic as some more than other understand (or gave for granted) the business-y nature of GW. Other people don't or refuse to believe this is the case and those have the right to express their opinion.

Please let's tune it down guys; we can do it, we are the ones that refused the toxic talks of WHFB during its decadent period, don't let that come back.?

 

[Kurrilino]

6 hours ago, Craptrain said:

People, some perspective here please.  We literally just finished the wave of releases for SCE and Nighthaunt.  So yeah, there were no huge reveals at Warhammer Fest, but that doesn't mean there won't be any at Nova or that there's nothing on the horizon for AoS.  As someone who plays both 40k and AoS, I have been beyond happy with how the past year of releases has gone.

Exercise a little patience and realize that GW has multiple systems and armies to support other than your specific one or two.

With that said you have to consider that this is a AOS forum and people may give a "kitten" about your 40K happiness.

I'm not one of them but i understand how people could see your comment as insulting.

 

[Craptrain]

32 minutes ago, Kurrilino said:

With that said you have to consider that this is a AOS forum and people may give a "kitten" about your 40K happiness.

I'm not one of them but i understand how people could see your comment as insulting.

 

My happiness is not 40k-based.  It's Warhammer-based (both 40k and AoS).  Heck, I have fully built and painted every unit in the Nighthaunt battletome just this summer (Kurdoss Valentian and Bladegheists still in progress).  I think you misinterpreted my point.

Edited August 19, 2018 by Craptrain