The Rumour Thread

[Gutsu17]

4 minutes ago, OkayestDM said:

I'm of the mind that if something happens to BoC, it will be the current models shifting to TOW and a new range released for AoS. There's a lot of excellent design space for weird mutant beasties, but the "all goats" motif of current beasts does put a design limiter on how far they can stretch the envelope before the models don't look like they belong.

An overhaul would allow them to add Pestigors, Khorngors, and updated or faction specific chaos spawn, and then release rank-and-file BoC who tie the disparite god-specific beasts together aesthetically. 

There's a LOT of design space available if they overhaul BoC, I find it hard to believe that GW would pass up that kind of opportunity (especially since, as others have said, it allows them to create a copyrightable IP in the process.)

And, most of the "this faction is getting deleted/souped" rumors were wrong, and i dont see why gw would do that, especially considering that if they wanted to squat them, there was a perfect oppounity with TOW release, just dont give them the 3rd ed book until OW comes out

[Gitzdee]

This might be an unpopular opinion. I would love for BoC to distance themselves from the god specific designs, those could still have a home in the other tomes. I would love to see a version of beasts i dont ever want to encounter in the woods. Keep the goats and bulls and add things like bears (honey RE?), badgers, moose etc and throw it in the AoSification mill.

Edited February 1 by Gitzdee

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

28 minutes ago, Chikout said:

If BoC are squatted from AoS it really would be a first for the game. We've had factions from the old world cut, we've had sections of ranges disappear like the the cities stuff, we've had battle tomes get souped, and we had factions get reimagined like legions of Nagash but we've never had a whole battletome and it's range of minis get dropped from the game. 

In fact the only time a faction has been completely dropped from a GW game was the squats themselves. Everything else got moved or absorbed or changed or forgotten like the sisters. 

It would be a bigger deal than some people are making it out to be.

You are completely right and it is important to point it out. An AoS faction that has had a battletome for 2 editions being removed without replacement would be an extraordinary development. Even if they remain playable in TOW.

Also important to point out: So far, no develoment on the AoS side has been done "with TOW in mind", as far as we can tell. TOW does not dictate the future of AoS factions.

 

[EonChao]

4 hours ago, Ejecutor said:

Well, in this case it was said by a "rumour monger" or two. So it is not like reading tea leaves

It wasn't said by a credible rumour monger so there's nothing too back it up at the moment.

2 hours ago, cyrus said:

He is not just an influencer: his rumors on chorfs coming in 4th edition was "liked" from our seer Whitefang ( the original).

So even if it sounds weird we have recently seen a lot of kits from cities that have been discontinued and we will see them back in tow : Freeguild/Empire , Wandereres/Wood elves , Phoenix temple/High Elves.

 

He's an influencer either with a source that he isn't clear about or he's an influencer who guessed that chorfs are coming in 4th like many of us here have because it's what a chunk of the community has been expecting for a while.

2 hours ago, EntMan said:

Do we know enough yet to establish how accurate 'Whitefang back me up' is as a rumour monger?

They may well have been spot on about somethings so far, none come to mind but it might be I just don't remember.

But they were definitely wrong about seeing dwarves by the end of January.

He posted a random vague 4chan rumour, and then said that we'd be seeing Orcs and Goblins and Dwarves by the end of January for TOW, and did so over a week after GW had already announced they were doing a launch event for it at Warhammer World the same as they did for Heresy. There were five factions that could have been previewed there so it was hardly a stab in the dark.

1 hour ago, Ejecutor said:

He said we would see new TOW content before the end of the month and they showed O&G. That's his record so far.

 

1 hour ago, Ejecutor said:

So far 1 out of 1.

Again, GW had already announced a launch event for TOW at Warhammer World before he posted that. It's reiterating existing knowledge with a tiny bit of guess work on a burner account. That's not reliable in the slightest (he was also wrong as he said Dwarves would be previewed too).

 

Honestly it's sometimes shocking how quickly the discourse in this thread falls apart at the barest mention of something moving to legends, bonesplitters or soup. If it happens it'll suck but at least wait until someone more credible backs the rumour up first.

Edited February 1 by EonChao

[Hollow]

5 hours ago, Beliman said:

A new purge would not help AoS. I get that TOW is still hot and throwing stuff there is like printing money. But removing factions that people invested, that's not the right move.

I completely disagree. I think a new purge is exactly what AoS needs.

With the approach of AoS 4 and the release of TOW, it is the perfect time to further differentiate the two settings and clean up the AoS lines. I honestly think that GW has been too slow in removing, replacing or renewing fantasy miniatures across the AoS line over the last 9 years. I would much rather see the faction lines across the AoS section of Warhammer.com be filled with fully supported, in-stock lines, with older, under-performing kits being removed.

Make space and free resources for newer kits and refreshes. I'm not a fan of how bloated and unwieldy GW product lines are. Use MTO for splash releases of older kits. The reality is that I think it is unrealistic to support product lines, that together, are composed of thousands of different products. It's absurd. It's a logistical headache that I think genuinely affects the ability of GW to properly explore new and creative design space.

2025 will mark the 10th Anniversary of AoS. I hope that towards the end of next year, we will have seen a purge of the majority of older fantasy minis from the AoS line. (Of course, there are still some that work within the AoS line, but the older Dark Elf kits? Purge baby purge!) 

I have thought for a while that Grand Alliance Chaos would be best served with a total of 8 factions. 

1. Blades of Khorne
2. Disciples of Tzeentch
3. Hedonites of Slaanesh
4. Maggotkin of Nurgle
5. Slaves to Darkness
6. Skaven
7. Beasts of Chaos (Renamed with a complete aesthetic, thematic and plastic over-haul)
8. Chorfs

At the center of the 8 Mortal Realms lies the 8 points. The Chaos Grand Alliance with 8 factions. There is a numerical elegance to that which appeals to me. With those 8 factions, the Grand Alliance would be very well served. 8 factions would allow for significant differentiation for collecting, modelling, painting and playing. They would also have AoS thematics and aesthetics.

A more general point regarding AoS and GW model support. People are different and want different things, some on this forum openly state that for AoS they would prefer there wasn't anything genuinely new added to the game, just updates to existing kits. Some think there should never be any new factions and GW should focus on the 24 that exist, tweaking and updating existing factions. Some think that if GW releases a model it should be supported with rules and retail presence until the heat death of the Universe and any attempt to move on from that product is like spitting in their mother's face. 

I personally do not agree with any of the positions above. I think that GW should be far more up-front and ruthless about the fact that some models will be released, supported for some time and then potentially removed. Done. The expectation that some GW customers have that if GW moves to "squat" something it is somehow a personal attack and they do not care about their customers is utterly absurd to me. A PLC like GW does not just stop selling products that sell well. 

I also feel as though it would mark a stagnation of the game (and for the designers) if things just essentially stayed the same. With just updates and refreshes to existing concepts. I don't want AoS to just have updates and refreshes year on year. I want GW to explore and take risks within the AoS design landscape. If something isn't working, dump it! move on and try something new. 

I have said this before but It's a philosophy that I really think would best serve AoS. The game and its various product lines should be treated like a Bonzai tree. Frequently watered, often fed and annually pruned.

What does pruning do for a tree? 

The Tree can stop producing fruit or new vegetation, dead leaves and branches sap energy from the rest of the tree. Too many dead limbs will result in a sickly tree that produces very little fruit or new foliage. Tree pruning is the best way to encourage new growth and increased yield.

Edited February 1 by Hollow

[Hawke]

55 minutes ago, Gitzdee said:

This might be an unpopular opinion. I would love for BoC to distance themselves from the god specific designs, those could still have a home in the other tomes. I would love to see a version of beasts i dont ever want to encounter in the woods. Keep the goats and bulls and add things like bears, badgers, moose etc and throw it in the AoSification mill.

This so much, BoC for me are the purest chaos and I want to see this in the models. They should be dark, twisted and secretive, so much that they make chaos god aligned factions think: "oof now that's a little much". They should be out in the woods conducting rituals that make no sense to bring about imcomprehensible dooms and omens. So much potential.

I love the goat and bull looks, mostly as they bring to life the old Christian aesthetics of what pagan evil looks like, and the fear of what happens when you stray further from civilization. What I'm saying is I want the devil goat, Black Phillip, from the film "the Witch" in model form 🤣

[Garrac]

To still have the skavens on a Grand Alliance is like bringing the guy who hates you and everyone you know and wants you dead just because you exist to a WoW raid party.

Technically, you can invite him, and he'll go with the group, but don't doubt for a second that the guy is just going to pull all the bosses to kill the party while you aren't looking, and then laugh at your loser face, even if he dies as well.

Edited February 1 by Garrac

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

11 minutes ago, Hollow said:

I completely disagree. I think a new purge is exactly what AoS needs.

 

11 minutes ago, Hollow said:

Beasts of Chaos (Renamed with a complete aesthetic, thematic and plastic over-haul)

There is definitely a big difference between a purge and an overhaul.

Beast of Chaos getting squatted would be unprecedented and (in my opinion) hugely damaging in terms of player trust.

Beast of Chaos getting a new model line and faction name would just be what we should expect to happen. Because that is the model of other reworked WHFB factions, such as Soulblight Gravelords and the Cities of Sigmar Freeguild. Skaven fans should also expect this for 4th ed. Some Skaven kits will be gone without a direct replacement when they get their update.

Personally, I don't know why genuine inside sources would frame "Beast of Chaos are getting an overhaul" (if that is the case) as "Beasts of Chaos are soon not going to exist in AoS anymore", though.

[MitGas]

1 hour ago, Gitzdee said:

This might be an unpopular opinion. I would love for BoC to distance themselves from the god specific designs, those could still have a home in the other tomes. I would love to see a version of beasts i dont ever want to encounter in the woods. Keep the goats and bulls and add things like bears (honey RE?), badgers, moose etc and throw it in the AoSification mill.

Yeah, I'd also like them to be their own thing. More mutated, more variety. Give the semi-vanilla ones to the 4 Gods but make the true children of Chaos scary as FEC (😇)!

[Hollow]

9 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

There is definitely a big difference between a purge and an overhaul.

 

Is there? If the faction name is changed and every model in the line is removed and a new faction with completely different models, units, thematics, aesthetics, characters and play style takes its place? Like... ok. I feel like semantics over terminology are irrelevant at that point. 

Edited February 1 by Hollow

[DrossyGob]

3 hours ago, cyrus said:

He is not just an influencer: his rumors on chorfs coming in 4th edition was "liked" from our seer Whitefang ( the original).

So even if it sounds weird we have recently seen a lot of kits from cities that have been discontinued and we will see them back in tow : Freeguild/Empire , Wandereres/Wood elves , Phoenix temple/High Elves.

 

Rob's speculation isn't credible, Whitefang's confirmation is the important part. Rob also speculated Ghouls and Horrors would be updated and strongly cautioned viewers from buying them and particularly the Dawnbringers bundle.

[sandlemad]

I’m intrigued by the tension here between “BoC are so unpopular that they are getting squatted from AoS, with all their minis going to TOW” and “BOC are so popular that are getting a complete and total range overhaul, with all their minis going to TOW”.

Admittedly this is coming from the (rather frantic and wildeyed) discourse here rather than the originating rumour/speculation, but still.

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

9 minutes ago, Hollow said:

Is there? If the faction name is changed and every model in the line is removed and a new faction with completely different models, units, thematics, aesthetics, characters and play style takes its place? Like... ok. I feel like semantics over terminology are irrelevant at that point. 

Yeah, there is. Because AoS faction overhauls have not been "remove one faction, introduce a different unrelated faction". There has always been a strong continuity. An overhauled BoC faction, for example, would almost certainly be picking up the existing plot threads surrounding Morghur etc.

 

4 minutes ago, DrossyGob said:

Rob's speculation isn't credible, Whitefang's confirmation is the important part. Rob also speculated Ghouls and Horrors would be updated and strongly cautioned viewers from buying them and particularly the Dawnbringers bundle.

Yeah, rob is not a reliable source of rumours. He just throws whatever he hears out there. If I recall correctly, he was echoing the idea that BoC might get rolled into S2D at the start of the edition, and we all know that nothing came of that.

 

Just now, sandlemad said:

I’m intrigued by the tension here between “BoC are so unpopular that they are getting squatted from AoS, with all their minis going to TOW” and “BOC are so popular that are getting a complete and total range overhaul, with all their minis going to TOW”.

Admittedly this is coming from the (rather frantic and wildeyed) discourse here rather than the originating rumour/speculation, but still.

Personally, I don't think BoC will get an overhaul because of their popularity, but rather because a) GW has kept them around long enough to signal that they want them to be part of AoS, and b) the inevitable fate of all old WHFB factions is to eventually get an AoS overhaul.

[Beliman]

37 minutes ago, Hollow said:

What does pruning do for a tree? 

The Tree can stop producing fruit or new vegetation, dead leaves and branches sap energy from the rest of the tree. Too many dead limbs will result in a sickly tree that produces very little fruit or new foliage. Tree pruning is the best way to encourage new growth and increased yield.

My family has some lands, and to be honest, yes, pruning helps the tree. But take in mind that you need to chop all their death, small, non-productive branches (we call them "the students") when the time is right. If you cut them before a snowy storm, some of this trees will be rotten from the inside. 

Removing old miniatures is not the problem, invalidating entire armies that had support until now, that's hard to swallow.

[Flippy]

17 minutes ago, Hollow said:

Is there? If the faction name is changed and every model in the line is removed and a new faction with completely different models, units, thematics, aesthetics, characters and play style takes its place? Like... ok. I feel like semantics over terminology are irrelevant at that point. 

Well, a new faction with completely different models, units, thematics, aesthetics, characters and play style should indeed be classified as purge of the previous faction. But GW doesn't have to go this far. You can serve the existing players and still introduce a lot of new element to the faction - new names, new models, new themes, new play style. Isn't this the recent case of CoS? They purged (or rather pruned) a lot of bloat (rightly so) and introduced many new elements - and I think they balanced the old with the new rather well. I would assume that this is the way, going forward, for the bloated WHFB factions - Skaven and BoC.

[Hollow]

8 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

Yeah, there is. Because AoS faction overhauls have not been "remove one faction, introduce a different unrelated faction".

Well, I see it differently. I wouldn't say that High Elves are in AoS. High Elves are a Core faction in ToW. Whilst there is clearly a thematic continuation from HE to Lumieth, they are two different factions, with two different model lines, for two different game systems. (The same thing that might happen with BoC) 

So the HE range was "squatted" from AoS. In the same way, the BoC range will be. The only question is if Beasts will get the Lumineth treatment or not. I would like to see that happen, but I could also see them just folding Beasts in AoS into the existing Chaos factions. 

Edited February 1 by Hollow

[Flippy]

Just now, Hollow said:

Well, I see it differently. I wouldn't say that High Elves are in AoS. High Elves are a Core faction in ToW. Whilst there is clearly a thematic continuation from HE to Lumieth, they are two different factions, with two different model lines, for two different game systems. (The same thing that might happen with BoC) 

So the HE range was "squatted" from AoS. In the same way the BoC range will be. The only question is is Beasts will get the Lumineth treatment or not. I would like to see that happen, but I could also see them just folding Beasts in AoS into the existing Chaos factions. 

High Elves were pruned, but the process was slow and included both introduction of Lumineth and (simultaneously) keeping elements of the HE in CoS. I'm not sure if the quick cut would be a better way of handling this.

[pnkdth]

From a gameplay standpoint I do not think BoC fits with S2D at all. BoC in S2D would just be a bunch of cultist level units with barely any reason to exist and the rest is already represented in one way or another bar some big monsters.

The flavour and style of the current BoC battletome, i.e. the raider/skirmish and sacrificial themes, would be completely lost. Especially since BoC would, at best, get some watered down sub-faction where X unit becomes battleline. 

 

 

Edited February 1 by pnkdth

[Hollow]

Just now, Flippy said:

I'm not sure if the quick cut would be a better way of handling this.

Practically it has already begun. The entire range apart from AoS units the Vanguard and Beastord are out of stock. They aren't in stock in Warhammer stores. They generally aren't in stock in Online retailers or FLGS. If you want to start and purchase a BoC faction right now. You can't. 

9 years of support since Fantasy is not what I would consider a "quick cut" 

[Ragest]

1 minute ago, pnkdth said:

From a gameplay standpoint I do not think BoC fits with S2D at all. BoC in S2D would just be a bunch of cultist level units with barely any reason to exist and the rest is already represented in one way or another bar some big monsters.

The flavour and style of the current BoCbattletome, i.e. the raider and sacrificial themes, would be completely lost. Especially since BoC would, at best, get some watered down sub-faction where X unit becomes battleline. 

 

 

S2D already have their own problems. The book is full of mixed stuff that just don't fit with each others.

I think is more probable that S2D divides into two books (warrios and darkoaths), and BoC being introduced into the second

[Hollow]

15 minutes ago, Beliman said:

But take in mind that you need to chop all their death, small, non-productive branches (we call them "the students") when the time is right.

Yes.  I actually think that now is the perfect time with AoS 4 launching and AoS 10th year approaching. 

[Chikout]

18 minutes ago, Hollow said:

Is there? If the faction name is changed and every model in the line is removed and a new faction with completely different models, units, thematics, aesthetics, characters and play style takes its place? Like... ok. I feel like semantics over terminology are irrelevant at that point. 

That's not an overhaul. It's just a new faction. An overhaul is what happened to cities or Seraphon, we got new units with new names but the inspiration from the old models is clear. We got some models dropped from the old range, some replaced, and some new units but the core identity of the faction is similar. 

For me the beasts situation is like this. 

If we get a cities or Seraphon style update, that's perfect. Everybody wins. If we get the range reduced but incorporated into the slaves to Darkness book, that's not ideal but just about ok. If we get the faction dropped wholesale at the start of 4th edition with no replacement in sight, that's a terrible mistake. 

The problem with the aggressive policy you suggest is that armies of miniatures aren't like other products. It took me two years to finish building and painting the soul wars box set. A 2000 point army costs hundreds of pounds and can represent hundreds or thousands of hours of work by a collector. Their secrecy about updates doesn't help. If there was more warning the cuts would be less painful. 

GW have mostly been very good at keeping products in stock for a long time and I hope this trend continues while still allowing for the introduction of new things. 

As for the High Elves there was never a high elf battletome which makes this a very different proposition. If they were going to cut BoC they should have done at the start of 2nd edition before the setting settled down. 

 

 

[Ejecutor]

37 minutes ago, Flippy said:

Well, a new faction with completely different models, units, thematics, aesthetics, characters and play style should indeed be classified as purge of the previous faction. But GW doesn't have to go this far. You can serve the existing players and still introduce a lot of new element to the faction - new names, new models, new themes, new play style. Isn't this the recent case of CoS? They purged (or rather pruned) a lot of bloat (rightly so) and introduced many new elements - and I think they balanced the old with the new rather well. I would assume that this is the way, going forward, for the bloated WHFB factions - Skaven and BoC.

[mawhis117]

11 minutes ago, Chikout said:

That's not an overhaul. It's just a new faction. An overhaul is what happened to cities or Seraphon, we got new units with new names but the inspiration from the old models is clear. We got some models dropped from the old range, some replaced, and some new units but the core identity of the faction is similar. 

For me the beasts situation is like this. 

If we get a cities or Seraphon style update, that's perfect. Everybody wins. If we get the range reduced but incorporated into the slaves to Darkness book, that's not ideal but just about ok. If we get the faction dropped wholesale at the start of 4th edition with no replacement in sight, that's a terrible mistake. 

The problem with the aggressive policy you suggest is that armies of miniatures aren't like other products. It took me two years to finish building and painting the soul wars box set. A 2000 point army costs hundreds of pounds and can represent hundreds or thousands of hours of work by a collector. Their secrecy about updates doesn't help. If there was more warning the cuts would be less painful. 

GW have mostly been very good at keeping products in stock for a long time and I hope this trend continues while still allowing for the introduction of new things. 

As for the High Elves there was never a high elf battletome which makes this a very different proposition. If they were going to cut BoC they should have done at the start of 2nd edition before the setting settled down. 

 

 

It seems to me that it's TOW that has tipped the scales. There have been rumours for a while of a conflict between the main stdio that makes AOS and the Specialist Studio making TOW over which lines would go where, and that BoC were a focus of that conflict. 

TOW has seven "Legacy" armies, which have recieved a free PDF, and will be getting no more, presumably because they're going to feature in AOS, so it would make sense for at least one AOS faction to go the other way.

I can easily see GW taking the view that there aren't many BoC players anyway, the ones there are can still use their models in TOW, and there'll be a replacement faction along in a moment to fill the void. 

You have my genuine sympathies if that happens, but it makes sense to me from GW's perspective

Edited February 1 by mawhis117

[Ragest]

7 minutes ago, Chikout said:

If they were going to cut BoC they should have done at the start of 2nd edition before the setting settled down. 

GW wants to sell stuff, if you come at the start of 3rd edition and say "hey, BoC is going to be squatted some point between 2024 and 2027" you automatically stop to sell them.

They did the opposite, BoC was the most broken army for months and did the bare minimun to mantain them, with just a tome and a hero, no more units, no warbands, no underworlds band. 

Now the stock is almost empty, anyone can come at the end of the edition saying "but I just started them", because is impossible and the next batch will come for sure with squared bases and old world boxes.