Jump to content

The Rumour Thread


Recommended Posts

49 minutes ago, Ejecutor said:

I don't agree with you here. I like to get different warbands with different themes but let's say I want something similar to Necromunda because I would like a Witch Hunters warband that is expanded every time instead of getting that warband and then moving into something different. 

I am requesting a game without playing the game, yes. Am I requesting a rules change directly? No, but my request could require the rules to change in order to make it possible. Is my request less valid because I didn't play the game? I don't think so.

but that's not feasible.

Everyone has their own idea of what would be their ideal game in their head (and in our imagination everything works flawlessly), and you can't cater to everyones tastes. 

But on the other hand, you can listen to people that actually plays your game and if you find it necessary bring that feedback to further develop it. 

Yeah, you can also just implement stuff that changes core aspects of the game with the hopes of bringing new people to the game and hope that the current players are going to stay or that you're going to bring more in than are leaving. 

Its a matter of how much data you have and what risks want to take.

And then is the stuff like "make it more necromunda", but that possibly means a different thing for everyone that asks for it. 

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

3 hours ago, GloomkingWortwazi said:

Intriguing post from my local store:
image.png.7e93cdc5f2927d7f81963da47541f57f.png

Weird hint about weird things, or just some Warhammer store staff jibber-jabber? I'm kind of assuming the later.

There are devotees of the Great Horned Rat from other species than Skaven? That’s really not news, that‘s just Skreech Verminking from this very board!

  • Haha 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr_Whateley said:

How many of you like the concept of a "necromunda like game" but actually don't play Warcry?

Because we, the players (at least all my gaming circle) are comfortable with the game, would like minor tweaks (and don't like the removal of our warbands, because we have a lot and don't want them to become unplayable).

Again, my point being: Are you playing Warcry these days and think Necromunda style would be better, OR you don't play Warcry and think Necromunda rules would make you enter the game? Thanks for your responses in advance.

Play Warcry and think Necromunda style would be better - AND would get some other players in my group in who don't play, if it did as they are looking for that fix but AoS.

Edit: so if it changes, great, it it doesn't well OK, if a new game that isn't Warcry brings what my groups after then even better!

Edited by GloomkingWortwazi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Ejecutor said:

Imo, as long as as you are a customer and buy the product, you have the same rights to requests changes. Even if you never played it.

Your same logic could be reversed. Not letting the game change because there's people that enjoy it in its current state you are blocking others from potentially enjoy it with some changes. It is a a complicate balance. The ideal scenario would be that GW could be able to release different games to suit those that request something like Necromunda and also keep Warcry, but we all know that's complicate.

Also, never forget you can play old editions. For example, if you enjoyed First edition warcry because it was purely Chaos, why not playing it? Some times seems like players forget there's that option or are lead by the consumism and just play the current version.

Of course you have the right to request changes, but it shouldn't mean they should listen to your requests. Warcry is an amazing game and doing really well, but if you listen to people who don't play Warcry about how to change it, you might completely alienate your existing playerbase without any guarantee that the new product is going to be picked up by those demanding changes.

It's the same thing that happens with some armies. A loud minority of non-Fyreslayers players are always ready to shout how Fyreslayers should be removed/completely changed/rolled into another army. The army already has a dedicated fanbase and if recent polls are to be believed, they're nowhere near as unpopular as people claim they are. Same thing with people calling for Duardin Soup, it's nearly almost people who don't play Duardin armies and who claim 'they'd purchase a mixed army in a heartbeat' yet most likely will never actually commit to a statement like that.

Changing an entire army or game to fit the preferences of a loud minority who dislikes it is a great way to lose your dedicated fanbase without getting much in return.

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 3
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone say they wanted Warcry’s rules to be more like Necromunda’s. One’s tight and modern, the other’s a charmingly janky old school affair. They’re different beasts and everyone knows that.

I feel that angle’s actually a distraction, in fact. The Necromunda comparison is to a (semi-hypothetical as it wasn’t even fully realised in 1st ed) version of Warcry focused around multiple e.g. chaos warbands or CoS gangs duking it out in a particular fleshed out place. It’s about the range and the setting, not the rule system.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mr_Whateley said:

How many of you like the concept of a "necromunda like game" but actually don't play Warcry?

Because we, the players (at least all my gaming circle) are comfortable with the game, would like minor tweaks (and don't like the removal of our warbands, because we have a lot and don't want them to become unplayable).

Again, my point being: Are you playing Warcry these days and think Necromunda style would be better, OR you don't play Warcry and think Necromunda rules would make you enter the game? Thanks for your responses in advance.

Playing Warcry with a few people right now and switching the rules to a Necromunda system would go contrary to everything we like about Warcry. The premise of Warcry being so easily accessible is also attracting a lot more players. Changing the rules to Necromunda/Mordheim/Whatever else would most likely lead to us all quitting.

Simple and accessible core rules, defined and internally balanced loadouts, short games, easy for new players to just buy a warband and immediately join and just a whole lot of fun are things that define Warcry for us. Changing that to appease people who either don't play or do play but want to actually play something else would be very disappointing.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, sandlemad said:

I feel that angle’s actually a distraction, in fact. The Necromunda comparison is to a (semi-hypothetical as it wasn’t even fully realised in 1st ed) version of Warcry focused around multiple e.g. chaos warbands or CoS gangs duking it out in a particular fleshed out place. It’s about the range and the setting, not the rule system.

The expanded scope of 2nd edition Warcry got a lot of people into the game though. I think it'd be a waste to limit it again.

I can definitely see a Blight City 'Mordheim' esque Warcry boxset of CoS vs Skaven happening, but personally I wouldn't want the entire season to be about that since not many other armies would really fit in that setting. But then again, GW can write the lore however they want.

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

3 minutes ago, Gaz Taylor said:

+++ Mod Hat On +++

Can we move the discussion about Warcry blended with Mordheim or Necromunda to another topic please? It sounds really cool and I would be a fan of it but I think it needs it's own topic ;) 

Apologies, I think the mention of it a few days back breathed life back into the sporadic debate 😅. Moving on!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, what do we expect from today's short story? Seems that GW is trying to put almost every faction on them, even if it is just a small mention.

We have all the grand alliances covered between the short stories and the books, so IMO it is time to start hinting the end of the plot. Maybe one focused on Abraxia? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, GloomkingWortwazi said:

Intriguing post from my local store:
image.png.7e93cdc5f2927d7f81963da47541f57f.png

Weird hint about weird things, or just some Warhammer store staff jibber-jabber? I'm kind of assuming the later.

I wouldn't be a huge fan of it if they were to take it this way but Beasts of Chaos? I suppose GHR and Beastmen's distain of Chaos does sort of align?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Ejecutor said:

Maybe one focused on Abraxia

Possibly they could also do a vandus leading up to his confrontation with Khul or vice versa, Ionus in his black towers teasing the whole Ruination chamber opening or City of Verdigris seeing the incoming shadow of Abraxia coming over

Just hope it not the destruction of Phoenicium that has to be in the book itself not a short story that does it off screan. That would be uber lame especially with all the build up 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, GloomkingWortwazi said:

Intriguing post from my local store:
image.png.7e93cdc5f2927d7f81963da47541f57f.png

Weird hint about weird things, or just some Warhammer store staff jibber-jabber? I'm kind of assuming the later.

Oh by the way the name of the human cultists of the Great Horned Rat back in Old world was call the Cult of the Yellow Fang (i think they're were mention in AOS don't remember if it was in soulbound) 

Could be a warcry warband in the same vein as the Horns of Hashut

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Dragon-knight77 said:

Possibly they could also do a vandus leading up to his confrontation with Khul or vice versa, Ionus in his black towers teasing the whole Ruination chamber opening or City of Verdigris seeing the incoming shadow of Abraxia coming over

Just hope it not the destruction of Phoenicium that has to be in the book itself not a short story that does it off screan. That would be uber lame especially with all the build up 

I have the feeling that, while we thought Vandus and Khul would have their moment in this narrative, this plot would be pushed to the next edition with the proper miniatures release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Dragon-knight77 said:

Oh by the way the name of the human cultists of the Great Horned Rat back in Old world was call the Cult of the Yellow Fang (i think they're were mention in AOS don't remember if it was in soulbound) 

Could be a warcry warband in the same vein as the Horns of Hashut

Oh, so Whitefang is a cleaner version of those cultists?!

  • Haha 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Dragon-knight77 said:

Oh by the way the name of the human cultists of the Great Horned Rat back in Old world was call the Cult of the Yellow Fang (i think they're were mention in AOS don't remember if it was in soulbound) 

Could be a warcry warband in the same vein as the Horns of Hashut

First properly update the entire skaven range. Then we can talk about getting humans to be racists to.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Btw, I didnt notice this section on the AoS reveals:

image.png.c149a1434c29c9ba1b6e1625e11ac170.png

It's possible we're getting all the starter box reveals thru Monday reveals instead of a big preview (would be stupid to make a whole section with only 5 articles or inserting a big article there when there's already an index on the tab, but who knows with the "go to the bin goats" enterprise)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Garrac said:

Btw, I didnt notice this section on the AoS reveals:

image.png.c149a1434c29c9ba1b6e1625e11ac170.png

It's possible we're getting all the starter box reveals thru Monday reveals instead of a big preview (would be stupid to make a whole section with only 5 articles or inserting a big article there when there's already an index on the tab, but who knows with the "go to the bin goats" enterprise)

Hum, in which article is that? I checked a couple and I don't see that new section.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ejecutor said:

Yup. Just removed the link to avoid confusion. Twitter released new pics, like the full Liberator unit one that came after the initial lonely one.

Just checked, there's no new clanrat amongst the pics, is just a "name the new clanrats" post

Also

image.png.39e393e605788a49a74b5ec4f41a92f0.png

Jeremy

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ejecutor said:

Hum, in which article is that? I checked a couple and I don't see that new section.

It's on the AoS index when you click the tab, here

image.png.11545b85cd89587fe5e996e0d0148721.png

You can see the "reveals" section scrolling downwards

image.png.44908d57170a160059eed54d1d7285f5.png

I presume the unpaid intern didnt update it for the rest of the articles

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Garrac said:

It's on the AoS index when you click the tab, here

image.png.11545b85cd89587fe5e996e0d0148721.png

You can see the "reveals" section scrolling downwards

image.png.44908d57170a160059eed54d1d7285f5.png

I presume the unpaid intern didnt update it for the rest of the articles

Why is it even a separate element?

If they are going to paste the same footer into every AoS article they might as well have put it into a single one with a divider or something.
And the two parts use exactly the same template down to the class names.

Bit off topic, but the inefficiency of this imho is pretty weird. Unless they only want the model reveals section in just the index article.

Anyway, how many legs do we think a new Cogfort could have?

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...