The Rumour Thread

[EntMan]

1 minute ago, GloomkingWortwazi said:

Because we want something that isn't a large hungry human or an angry green boy 😂

Normal size angry humans? Still makes no sense to me that there's not Destruction humans. Abandoned by Sigmar and an alternative to the Dark Oath?

[GloomkingWortwazi]

1 minute ago, EntMan said:

Normal size angry humans? Still makes no sense to me that there's not Destruction humans. Abandoned by Sigmar and an alternative to the Dark Oath?

I'm thinking something more quiet, maybe a little chitinous 🦂

[Ejecutor]

2 hours ago, EonChao said:

Nope, the Frigate and the Ironclad are behemoths but none of them are artillery

To be fair in the 4th edition they are not going to be tagged as Artillery or Behemot, so we could consider them Artillery now.

[Ragest]

11 minutes ago, RollSixxess said:

I don’t see a reason why GW doesn’t split Orruks into two factions to give Destruction another faction given how lacking they currently are

To help his logistical problems, to control releases, to give deep into two small ranges, to just make one tome…

Reallistically I can’t see one business reason to split them but many “players feel that”

[Garrac]

Btw, my reasoning for clawlord and clanrats being april's reveals:

-Fantasy marines also got their battleline/melee troop revealed

-You just anounced clanrats are going away, calm down your crazy fandom revealing the refresh

-Clawlord is the clearest thing from the trailer

-Clawlord is your centerpiece-likish model on the starter box

-Regular troop + character are easy sell-ups before revealing the full starter box, makes thing easier for marketing (you'll fin harder filling a whole month-ish with just 3 jezzails and a machinegun, you need troops and characters there)

It's possible there are other reveals on the way, ofc. This is just me speculating, basing my opinion on GW patterns and how they love to market this things. But I think it's a safe bet. For the fantasy marines id say it's also safe to predict a character reveal on april 15th.

Edited April 6 by Garrac

[Nezzhil]

The only reason to split a faction is because they are gonna remove others or are gonna merge others

[Chikout]

1 hour ago, Garrac said:

Ok, so, trying to guess the rat side of the starter box, correct me anyone if I'm wrong. The box will have:

-Clawlord on rat beast with halberd and machinegun

-Grey seer on foot

-40 clanrats (with 2 command groups), box ala termagant like

-3 Jezzails

-2 Rat Ogres

-Machinegun artillery thing

My biggest wish for the Skaven side is that it's not 40 clanrats. 20 clanrats and 10 stormvermin or 10 skyre acolytes would be much preferable. 

[EntMan]

6 minutes ago, GloomkingWortwazi said:

I'm thinking something more quiet, maybe a little chitinous 🦂

Yeah, also them 🐜

[Hollow]

I wonder how sustainable GW's approach to publishing is in the medium to long term. They have the numbers and nobody can say they haven't pumped the publishing bandwagon for every penny it is worth. However, I feel that more and more people (% wise at least) are forgoing the purchase of Battletomes/Codexs. 

I do not doubt that the AoS design studio probably has most (If not all) of AoS 4 already planned out and are at the conceptual stages of AoS 5 and beyond. 

Will we just see a continuation of the status quo with how "Factions" are presented? I could see GW wanting to try and consolidate publications in a few years so that a single book appeals to more people (Campaign books) rather than splitting up the publications as much as they do now. I can see rules becoming ever more digital. What do Battletomes become if you remove the printed Battlescrolls and Rules? 50 Odd pages of lore and unit descriptions? 

If digital ever becomes the main delivery system for rules and updates (which I can see happening by the end of this decade) then the whole concept of "faction number" might become almost irrelevant. 

Edited April 6 by Hollow

[Garrac]

1 minute ago, Chikout said:

My biggest wish for the Skaven side is that it's not 40 clanrats. 20 clanrats and 10 stormvermin or 10 skyre acolytes would be much preferable. 

Stormvermin on the starter box would actually be bad news. Those are monopose kits without a lot of room for customisation, and clanrats would already need a diferent kit. Doubt they'd just redo aaaaaall the skaven kits later on. Dont know if there's precedent on AoS, tho.

And also, a clanrats spam is a very easy way to get past the 60 miniatures mark on the starter box.

[RetconnedLegion]

FOMO-ing an arbitrarily removed range leaves a sour taste.

[Nezzhil]

28 minutes ago, Vasshpit said:

Yeah I'd like to be to able to just run one or the other myself and still be fun, enjoyable, and competitive. 

I've a feeling Kruleboyz are going to get a nice overhaul. 

That's a problem for being an initial faction book. SCE had the same problem and if It was not because the dragons the book would had been terrible all the edition.

[Nezzhil]

3 minutes ago, Hollow said:

I wonder how sustainable GW's approach to publishing is in the medium to long term. They have the numbers and nobody can say they haven't pumped the publishing bandwagon for every penny it is worth. However, I feel that more and more people (% wise at least) are forgoing the purchase of Battletomes/Codexs. 

I do not doubt that the AoS design studio probably has most (If not all) of AoS 4 already planned out and are at the conceptual stages of AoS 5 and beyond. 

Will we just see a continuation of the status quo with how "Factions" are presented? I could see GW wanting to try and consolidate publications in a few years so that a single book appeals to more people (Campaign books) rather than splitting up the publications as much as they do now. I can see rules becoming ever more digital. What do Battletomes become if you remove the printed Battlescrolls and Rules? 50 Odd pages of lore and unit descriptions? 

If digital ever becomes the main delivery system for rules and updates (which I can see happening by the end of this decade) then the whole concept of "faction number" might become almost irrelevant. 

They tried digital books on their mainline before and the piracy was atrociuous

[Garrac]

1 minute ago, Nezzhil said:

They tried digital books on their mainline before and the piracy was atrociuous

Didn't they sold those at ridiculous prices? Digital books are meant to be way cheaper.

[Ejecutor]

7 minutes ago, Garrac said:

Stormvermin on the starter box would actually be bad news. Those are monopose kits without a lot of room for customisation, and clanrats would already need a diferent kit. Doubt they'd just redo aaaaaall the skaven kits later on. Dont know if there's precedent on AoS, tho.

And also, a clanrats spam is a very easy way to get past the 60 miniatures mark on the starter box.

I think it would be just 20 clan rats and scenery.

[Garrac]

2 minutes ago, Ejecutor said:

I think it would be just 20 clan rats and scenery.

It's been quite long since GW put scenary on a starter box. The only big thing featured on the trailer is the Big-Horned-Rat-bell building, and that's both too high and too proxyable as other things for GW to dare and try out.

Edited April 6 by Garrac

[Nezzhil]

2 minutes ago, Garrac said:

Didn't they sell those at ridiculous prices? Digital books are meant to be way cheaper.

The only point to have digital books is how much the company wants to gain. If the numbers are not the expected who cares if we want books cheaper, they will cut that line for not being profitable.

[Chikout]

2 hours ago, Garrac said:

 

Oops that's what you get for playing halo and posting at the same time. 

Edited April 6 by Chikout

[Chikout]

11 minutes ago, Nezzhil said:

They tried digital books on their mainline before and the piracy was atrociuous

I'm very curious if the sales are that much better than before. There's still a lot of piracy and there's sites like wahapedia that have every single rule in a well presented searchable format. 

[Hollow]

The answer to piracy is to make legit media better quality, more accessible and convenient than pirated content. Imagine they still published much smaller runs of physical books in the future but a Warhammer+ subscription came with access to PDF's of all of GW material, with new digital publications released each week. Rules updated, FAQ's implemented and all fully integrated with army-building apps. 

The value add to the app would be insane. Combined with current content, having Warhammer+ as the primary hub for releasing "content" through a $10-a-month subscription service is a future I can easily see. 

 

[Gitzdee]

46 minutes ago, RollSixxess said:

I don’t see a reason why GW doesn’t split Orruks into two factions to give Destruction another faction given how lacking they currently are

I dont see a reason to cut into Orruk Warclans any further. I dont expect the lore to go any deeper if split. After a new Kruleboyz range + Underworlds and Warcry warbands and a big wave for Ironjawz i dont see many big things happening any time soon.

If any Destruction race should get split into a tome i would predict it to be Gitmob that moves into a Glareface Frazzlegitz tome. A Troggoth tome would be the dream, but i think they will stay with Gloomspite Gitz. 

And even then i would rather see something new join Destruction.

My biggest selfish wish is a Spiderfang update. I am kinda amazed to see them stay and Bonesplitterz leave to be honest.

Edited April 6 by Gitzdee

[GloomkingWortwazi]

6 minutes ago, Hollow said:

The answer to piracy is to make legit media better quality, more accessible and convenient than pirated content. Imagine they still published much smaller runs of physical books in the future but a Warhammer+ subscription came with access to PDF's of all of GW material, with new digital publications released each week. Rules updated, FAQ's implemented and all fully integrated with army-building apps. 

The value add to the app would be insane. Combined with current content, having Warhammer+ as the primary hub for releasing "content" through a $10-a-month subscription service is a future I can easily see. 

 

Yup.
Infinity, Legion, etc. all online, all free. I hate that rule books are part of GW's business model, especially as a method to manage updated game pieces, game balance and rules errors.

[madmac]

5 minutes ago, GloomkingWortwazi said:

Yup.
Infinity, Legion, etc. all online, all free. I hate that rule books are part of GW's business model, especially as a method to manage updated game pieces, game balance and rules errors.

GW battletomes are simply insanely expensive. I personally stopped buying them outside of army box deals a while ago, and it not because I dislike physical media, it's just impossible to justify spending $50+ on a slim hardback with rules that will be out of date before it even ships, not to mention all the copy-pasted lore, reused art, etc. Making them digital but at the same price point just makes the price-gouging feel that much more acute.

Edited April 6 by madmac

[Matrindur]

31 minutes ago, RetconnedLegion said:

FOMO-ing an arbitrarily removed range leaves a sour taste.

Do I see Vanguard Hunters on that shelf? They weren't on the list?

Maybe they are just going webstore only but who knows

[dmorley21]

44 minutes ago, Nezzhil said:

That's a problem for being an initial faction book. SCE had the same problem and if It was not because the dragons the book would had been terrible all the edition.

Your point about SCE is correct - but they did have some broken units. Fulminators and Longstrikes were the broken combo for a while.

39 minutes ago, Garrac said:

Didn't they sold those at ridiculous prices? Digital books are meant to be way cheaper.

Actually, they were like $25 IIRC. Fairly reasonable. Enough that I bought some for armies I didn’t play.