The Rumour Thread

[Burf]

37 minutes ago, Sheriff said:

So if you have an old army don't worry because you can be forced to start a new army? This is exactly what people are afraid of. 

Idoneth Deepkin involved starting a new army, Daughters of khaine can be played using 0 plastic models. The question is where are the chips gonna fall for your stuff?

New stuffs gonna come out, old stuffs gonna go away. It's the sad truth of Sigmar for the forseeable future. It sucks that GW aren't being more transparent about what their vision of AoSs future is, but really the only thing we can do about it is not buy stuff.

Though, if people are honest with themselves moving to narrative only isn't any huge loss. It's not like 99% of the models that aren't going to carry over were relevant anyway.

[michu]

How can they be more transparent about that? It was obvious from the very beginning that Bretonnia and Tomb Kings will be phased out eventually, because they can't support OOP armies indefinitely. If your army is still produced then you're probably safe for a long time. 

[Infeston]

44 minutes ago, michu said:

How can they be more transparent about that? It was obvious from the very beginning that Bretonnia and Tomb Kings will be phased out eventually, because they can't support OOP armies indefinitely. If your army is still produced then you're probably safe for a long time. 

They could simply and directly tell us which armys will be phased out or is planned to be phased out in the future. That would be transparent. Then you as a player would know which things you could still invest in.

For example I wouldn't buy any more Ogor models if I would know that they plan on removing them from the setting. Or put them into Legends. I want to play an army which will be supported in the future. But I have the feeling that GW doesn't tells us this directly, because they still want to sell their old kits and to maintain the illusion that they might be relevant in the future so the people will buy their stuff.

Sometimes the lack of transparency often has a special purpose.

Edited May 6, 2018 by Infeston

[Sharkbelly]

Then pick up one of the current ones. (This is coming from a Dogs of War player.)

Are there any companies out there that explain well in advance what they plan to do with product lines?

Edited May 6, 2018 by Sharkbelly

[Rogue Explorator]

20 minutes ago, michu said:

How can they be more transparent about that? It was obvious from the very beginning that Bretonnia and Tomb Kings will be phased out eventually, because they can't support OOP armies indefinitely. If your army is still produced then you're probably safe for a long time. 

Bretonnia and Tomb Kings are not what many are concerned about and are not the subject of the post you quoted though.

There are a lot of factions build from old miniatures currently included in AoS that have a very shaky future. It seems clear that as GW creates more and more new miniatures and factions for AoS, miniatures currently still produced will have to be moved to OOP. This is where GW is completely intransparent, there is no telling what will happen to the likes of Swifthawk Agents or even Greenskins and Gitmob.

Fans can do nothing but guess as to what will happen to the factions that would loose kits this way, creating a large amount of uncertainty and concern.

In this context the way legends has been launched and the way it is worded can easily be taken as another indicator that warscrolls and even entire factions will ultimately suffer the same fate that now befell those DE units currently not represented in AoS.

That non-legacy units currently valid for matched play will ultimately be phased out into legends and completely removed from matched play is a valid concern so long as GW continues sending out mixed signals including some (like the terming of the legends launch) very disencouraging ones.

 

Add to that concerns like those of Sherif, that there are currently some warscrolls that still offer options that used to be available in miniatures, but for which only parts of the options are still available (grot shaman and chaos sorcerer can take mounts, even though there is no mount option, Beastlords and Gorebulls can take all weapon options they had in WHFB even though there are not official miniatures for all of them). Unless GW where to give a clear statement on these, they will seem destined to the chopping block. It is no fun converting a miniature to represent a valid option if it could be removed at any time.

 

The problem, as I see it, is that GW likely can not be more transparent on their intentions for these factions and warscrolls, because they likely have no set in stone plans. If they say "There are currently no plans to phase out any Warscrolls and options included in the GHB 2017 Matched Play list" they will be held to it indefinitely. It is a case of damned if they do, damned if they don't case.

Likely, currently there are no plans to phase out anything included in the four Grand Alliance tomes in the next year or two. Long term, old kits will have to be removed to "make space". They would likely be handled like TK and Brets where, meaning you would still get a few years of them having matched play points removed. So the likeliest case is that even if you pick one of the greatest outlier factions, you will get to play them Matched Play for a few more years. But this is far from guaranteed

 

9 minutes ago, Infeston said:

They could simply and directly tell us which armys will be phased out or is planned to be phased out in the future. That would be transparent. Then you as a player would know which things you could still invest in.

For example I wouldn't buy any more Ogor models if I would know that they plan on removing them from the setting. Or put them into Legends. I want to play an army which will be supported in the future. But I have the feeling that GW doesn't tells us this directly, because they still want to sell their old kits and to maintain the illusion that they might be relevant in the future so the people will buy their stuff.

Sometimes the lack of transparency often has a special purpose.

I do not think GW themselves know what will and will not be ultimately removed. The point where more old legacy kits have to be phased out is propably still a fair bit out, likely they will not decide what to take OOP until that time (giving them more time to see what is popular and what is not).

In the context of that possibility, I think it unfair to assume GW is being intransparent for the sake of tricking people into spending money on soon invalidated models, particularly as bad sellers are the most likely to be cut, making the profits from such a move marginal at very best.

And as to be a bit unfair myself, nothing happens "sometimes often"

[Rogue Explorator]

21 minutes ago, Sharkbelly said:

Then pick up one of the current ones. (This is coming from a Dogs of War player.)

Are there any companies out there that explain well in advance what they plan to do with product lines?

I know it is likely a rethorical question, but I answer anyway:

Only those that make very long term plans and more importantly, whose customer must plan long term with their products.

The car industry tends to make a lot of public talk on their long term plans. Not to get to deep into it (it is a hot button), but this does not exactly make that industry a pillar of transparency. Nor does this necessarily create security in how long any given product will see continued support (like the manufacture of spare parts for repairs).

[Sleboda]

6 hours ago, HollowHills said:

With tomb kings and brettonia you've had basically 3 years of extended life. GW stopped making the kits. No one can buy them anymore.  It doesn't make sense for them to be valid in matched play. 

The rest of your post I agree with, but not this.

The passage of time itself does not make my legal-within-the-rules armies invalid for the game system of which they are a part.

I understand disappointment by others who want to get the army and can't, but that's no reason to tell me that my models are no longer valid.

Edited May 6, 2018 by Sleboda

[Infeston]

2 hours ago, Sharkbelly said:

Then pick up one of the current ones. (This is coming from a Dogs of War player.)

Are there any companies out there that explain well in advance what they plan to do with product lines?

But what if there is no faction under the new ones which fits me.

At the moment the only new army in Destruction is Ironjawz. We will also propably get a Goblin faction. But for me the only faction which is somewhat unique in Age of Sigmar for Destruction is Beastclaw Raiders and Gutbusters. 

Every fantasy setting has Goblins and Orks. But not many fantasy setting have an organized Ogre army with frostmounts. In most of the  fantasy settings Ogres are just dumb giant fat humanoids who are mostly alone.

If GW releases a new Ogre army or still pushes Beastclaw Raiders I am propably All-In. But like @Rogue Explorator said before, we don't really know what will get scrapped and what not.

 

Also some people mentioned that you could still play these armies even without points. While this may be true I have the feeling that matched play often defines how the game is played. And everything outside of matched play is often ignored by most of the players. 

For example, there are so many battle plans and scenarios which could be played. But most of the time people only play the 6 battle plans from the GHB instead of playing the other battleplans. 

So if there some units don't have any points you legitimize that people can tell you "This army is no longer valid. I won't play against this"

Edited May 6, 2018 by Infeston

[pseudonyme]

Concerning the absence of points, I really like this TGA thread http://www.tga.community/forums/topic/9381-open-play-lets-read-the-generals-handbook/

[michu]

What exactly was scrapped now? All non-OOP Dark Elves units are still available as Darkling Covens, Scourge Privateers and Order Serpentis. Nothing has been scrapped and I don't believe anything will be in the near future. 

Edited May 6, 2018 by michu

[Kyriakin]

I think the source of the nervousness is this quote from GW:

"As Warhammer Age of Sigmar continues to grow and evolve, it will give rise to all-new heroes and factions. Others may be consumed by battle, slain and themselves be consigned to Legend."

Players of the likes of Darkling Covens, Brayherd, Dispossessed, (etc.) are trying to work out if their faction will be "consumed by battle".

[AthlorianStoners]

I’d think it’s almost certain the 30 or so factions with battletomes and/or allegiance abilities will not be dropped. 

Theres absolutely no precedent as of now for units to get dropped anyway, but factions with heavy development would never be dropped.

[Infeston]

11 minutes ago, pseudonyme said:

Concerning the absence of points, I really like this TGA thread http://www.tga.community/forums/topic/9381-open-play-lets-read-the-generals-handbook/

I really like this thread.  After reading some posts I directly got motivated to play some open play battles. The problem is that I very often experienced that people want to play with very strict  matched play rules and aren't always open for open play battles, sadly.  Also people that concentrate too much on the wording of some abilties and use it for their advantage (where I would say "this might be the way the rule is written but its clearly not the way the rules was intended"). 

So the point with the trust issues from the thread is true. 

But I still fear that people might dismiss armies which have no matched play points or won't play against them, because they only see "Matched play" armies as legitimate armies.

[Ar-Pharazôn]

6 minutes ago, AthlorianStoners said:

I’d think it’s almost certain the 30 or so factions with battletomes and/or allegiance abilities will not be dropped. 

Theres absolutely no precedent as of now for units to get dropped anyway, but factions with heavy development would never be dropped.

This. If they've given your army some form of love, with a book, allegiance abilities, and mentions in the lore, then take a breather.  

Furthermore, if we take the Heralds from Malign Portents at face value, then Moonclan, Nighthaunt, and Slaves to Darkness have all received new units in AoS, and why would they add models to factions they will get rid of? If you play Aelves, look at Daughters of Khaine. They could easily do something similar with Phoenix Temple or Order Draconis.

I feel that GW is making a common sense business decision, which is to honor the past while also providing a pathway for fans to still get models that aren't going to be produced anymore. They have to grow AoS, which inevitably will lead to older models falling by the wayside. 

[michu]

Yes, Warhammer Legends is a way to bid farewell to the World-that-was and I can believe that some models (especially some really old ones that aged badly) will be phased out, but not whole armies.

 

[KevenM]

35 minutes ago, michu said:

What exactly was scrapped now? All non-OOP Dark Elves units are still available as Darkling Covens, Scourge Privateers and Order Serpentis. Nothing has been scrapped and I don't believe anything will be in the near future. 

This is pretty much how I see things. There's no precedent for GW deleting factions since AoS launched aside from the initial purge of the Brets/TK. Furthermore, I see  no indication of them wanting to remove more factions in tbe near future. Espeicially with older factions receiving allegiance abilities, artifacts & command traits via the GHBs...

No Darkling Covens, Scourge Privateers or Ordo Serpentis models have been removed from Matched Play as a result of the old WHFB Dark Elves going "Legends". Furthermore, those factions were all included as allies for DoK and IK - another indication they are unlikely to be retired in the near future.

Finally, we seen a number of old factions be  rehashed into AoS factions complete with battletomes and a handful of new kits: BCR, FEC, DoK, Bonesplitterz, Maggotkin, DoT, etc. I also don't see any indication that GW will stop doing this any time soon. 

All in all, I don't see any reason to stop collecting an army you love right now and feel like this is a bit of the proverbial storm in a teacup.

Edited May 6, 2018 by KevenM

[KillagoreFaceslasha]

So in an attempt to move away from the rampant fear from WHL: The tainted heart will release in August and indeed these two guys are lovebirds.

[Sleboda]

2 hours ago, Infeston said:

Also some people mentioned that you could still play these armies even without points. While this may be true I have the feeling that matched play often defines how the game is played. And everything outside of matched play is often ignored by most of the players. 

Much to their own loss.

I like matched play as an option to have, but the joy of this hobby we are in is the models, not the point values. The collecting, painting, etc. are what make it the thing it is instead of Risk and the like.

Interestingly, it's what makes Shadespire such a huge departure for GW. That  game is all about competitive play as opposed to the hobby experience.

Edited May 6, 2018 by Sleboda

[Sleboda]

1 hour ago, AthlorianStoners said:

I’d think it’s almost certain the 30 or so factions with battletomes and/or allegiance abilities will not be dropped. 

Theres absolutely no precedent as of now for units to get dropped anyway, but factions with heavy development would never be dropped.

I like your spirit, but GW history not only suggests, but actually demonstrates, that they can and will Squat not just units, but entire armies.

[AthlorianStoners]

44 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

I like your spirit, but GW history not only suggests, but actually demonstrates, that they can and will Squat not just units, but entire armies.

Even if that is the case, I wouldn’t think the above mentioned factions are ever going to be at risk. 

Something like Lion Rangers? Yeah sure they could go or be folded into another faction. 

[michu]

36 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

I like your spirit, but GW history not only suggests, but actually demonstrates, that they can and will Squat not just units, but entire armies.

Well, old GW was doing that, but I think they'll be more cautiuos now. There would have to be a really good reason to squat something. And considering recent Necromunda releases you could say, "That is not dead which can eternal lie, And with strange aeons, even Squats can be back"  .

 

[Gecktron]

45 minutes ago, Sleboda said:

I like your spirit, but GW history not only suggests, but actually demonstrates, that they can and will Squat not just units, but entire armies.

But they could have dropped these armies back when they released the Grand Alliance books and dropped TK and Bretonia. Everything that survived this is here to stay for the near-to-mid future. Not necessarily each faction but the models making up said faction. (So Shadowblades become a part of Malerions new Shadowkin faction but they dont drop the Assassin model)

[HollowHills]

7 hours ago, Sheriff said:

So if you have an old army don't worry because you can be forced to start a new army? This is exactly what people are afraid of. 

It doesn't make sense to divert resources into writing and updating rules for models which are no longer sold. There isn't any business sense in it at all. Neither does it make sense to encourage people to stick with armies they've owned since the nineties or early noughties. Part of the problem with warhammer fantasy was that the people who were enthusiastic about the game didn't buy new models. 

Games Workshop are being more supportive towards legacy armies than anyone has any right to expect. 

[Sheriff]

34 minutes ago, HollowHills said:

It doesn't make sense to divert resources into writing and updating rules for models which are no longer sold. There isn't any business sense in it at all. Neither does it make sense to encourage people to stick with armies they've owned since the nineties or early noughties. Part of the problem with warhammer fantasy was that the people who were enthusiastic about the game didn't buy new models. 

Games Workshop are being more supportive towards legacy armies than anyone has any right to expect. 

My models are new. Very new. They were in liquid form very recently.  They are just an old sculpt. It's ****** that new players are tricked into buying these models only for gw to say actually we are soon demoting you to narrative only, buy stormcast instead. 

[KevenM]

9 minutes ago, Sheriff said:

My models are new. Very new. They were in liquid form very recently.  They are just an old sculpt. It's ****** that new players are tricked into buying these models only for gw to say actually we are soon demoting you to narrative only, buy stormcast instead. 

Sure, except that GW hasn't said that and that there's no examples of them doing that in AoS. While on the other hand, they've taken a number of 'old' factions and AoS'ified them with battletomes and even sometimes a few new sculpts (BCR, DoK, Binesplitterz, FEC, the demons, etc.). Plus theres even rumours of a grot battletome for AoS so I'm not sure where all the concern comes from...