The Rumour Thread

[JPjr]

2 hours ago, warhammernerd said:

Can someone please explain to me, why a rumour thread on a non-affiliated GW site isn’t allowed to post links to images freely available on the web?  It’s not like the people posting it are breaking laws of any kind, the leaks are already out there not by people on this forum (and even if they were, any breaking of law would be along the lines of NDA’s between staff and GW)?

Because the contents of battletomes, codexes, core books, White Dwarf, etc etc ad infinitum are copyrighted, whether something’s been leaked or how readily available it is online in other places doesn’t change that.

now I get that you can say, well we’re not posting photos here just providing a link to that material and sure that’s a defence and it’s unlikely to end up with GW taking TGA to court but at the end of the day you’re still basically providing an index to copyrighted material.

Wargaming/RPGs as a whole are, let’s face it,  a small industry really, doubly so on the wretched little island that is the UK, and triply so when you’re just focused on one game produced by one company. 

Ben who owns this site is a very active part of the community, so it’s understandable that whatever his real feelings or situation might be, which I have zero knowledge of, he might want to exercise some degree of caution towards the company that his website and tournaments are solely dependent upon or probably as much of a consideration just does not want to ****** off people that he knows well & considers friends 

in my own business we’ve been totally wrecked the past couple of decades by copyright infringement and generally speaking if someone hosts a site that didn’t contain direct downloads of, for example, music albums but just links to where you can grab them, we might not send in the lawyers but it’s unlikely that we’d greet you with open arms at conventions, offer you job/work/sponsorship opportunities or treat you like a mate.

its hardly 1984, I mean one is not allowing people to posts links to copyrighted material about little plastic toy soldiers and the other is about a metaphorical totalitarian state that survives via the rewriting of truth and history, the corruption of language and thought, the constant brutal oppression of its people, a permanent state of war and the torture and destruction of any and all dissidents (which sure if you ask some of the more hyperbolic people involved in this hobby they’d say is a pretty fair description of GW but you can’t fix that 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️).

Edited July 10, 2020 by JPjr

[Scurvydog]

9 minutes ago, JPjr said:

a metaphorical totalitarian state that survives via the rewriting of truth and history, the corruption of language and thought, the constant brutal oppression of its people, a permanent state of war and the torture and destruction of any and all dissidents .

The inquisition has already dispatched an agent. Speaking ill of the imperium of man will not be tolerated. The Emperor protects.

Wait this i an AoS forum... 

I am still not 100% convinced GW is not somehow at least planning for these leaks, if not encouraging them, at least the warhammer community have been playing into the whole leak culture pretty heavily and with humour. Either they react super fast to leaks by often releasing polished preview and material just after, or the leaks are just often timed very conveniently.

[Nezzhil]

11 hours ago, KingBrodd said:

AOS 3.0 will probably have SCE and whatever army they're facing off in the Boxed Set have the first new tomes. I'd love it to be Orruk Warclans but their tome is quite new compared to others so it could also end up being Nurgle, though I'd rather they stay away from the standard Good Guy vs Chaos boxed set.

AoS 2.0 was the Endless Spells edition, thanks to the Necroquake and all the stuff.

I think AoS 3.0 will be the Siege edition. All the lore is preparing for big weaponry with the siege of Gordrakk, the war in Eightpoints, the mobilization of the Aelves armies... 

[JPjr]

6 minutes ago, Scurvydog said:

I am still not 100% convinced GW is not somehow at least planning for these leaks, if not encouraging them, at least the warhammer community have been playing into the whole leak culture pretty heavily and with humour. Either they react super fast to leaks by often releasing polished preview and material just after, or the leaks are just often timed very conveniently.

hmmm, I can see why people might think that but I don't buy it personally (encouraging them that is, I think they almost certainly plan for, and have contingencies for leaks on some level). at the end of the day they have to send out material to press/bloggers way ahead of release so inevitably some of it will leak, just ideally through keeping a tight promo list they keep it as close to release date as possible.

as for when things do leak all that polished preview material will generally have been prepared weeks or months in advance so it will be sat there ready, so that's easy enough for them to react.

but it's still a pain in the ******, when you're planning releases you want as much control as possible over what goes up when to carefully manage expectations and control how that info is revealed (after all if there's a community that will viciously overreact to some bit of half information then the man-babies and emotionally underdeveloped teens that make up a vocal segment of Warhammer's are a sureshot), you also don't want to have to make your staff run around trying to get an article online on a Saturday because somethings leaked when you'd rather they be, I don't know, down the pub, at the football, shopping or just relaxing.

as for playing into it and making light of it, well I mean we've all seen over the last however many years people have developed a sense of entitlement around this kind of stuff.

whether its bad photos of models or leaks of entire albums, once it's out that's the new reality and you have to deal with it. behind the scenes you might be righteously pissed off and doing everything you can to fix it but publicly it's often best to grin and bear it otherwise you get the nice bonus of not only having your material leaked and marketing plans messed with but legions of your apparently most loyal fans calling you every name under the sun for having the temerity of wanting to protect your own interests.

 

[warhammernerd]

The correct answer. X

[Gistradagis]

8 hours ago, CommissarRotke said:

how soon do you think? I know any date we can guess will be pushed back 3-6 months because of pandemic stuff. I had figured Q2 or 3 2021 for AOS 3.0 originally; it gets both Lumineth and Gargants out for a while while giving GW room to update any lagging tomes before a larger change.

Judging by the 9th Edition move to digital content, AOS 3.0 should be following suit. I can only hope there are two separate programming teams to both lighten the load and keep release schedule(s) on time...

At least another year, I'd say, and it has probably not been impacted by the Covid situation. Most of this kind of work can be continued during quarantine, in the end.

No, they are not separate teams. One of the GHB articles explained that the AoS stuff will be updated late in Azyr and the like due to the devs being busy with 9th.

[Chikout]

I think they are too cowardly with the ghbs and change too much with a new edition. A ghb with 20 or so warscroll updates and some allegiance ability changes would be much preferable to a new edition. A new edition feels like going back to square one in the search for a balanced game. 

[warhammernerd]

But, to be devils advocate. It just feels a bit odd on account of the relationship between Mr Curry bezzy and Mr Johnson former co-host of bad dice podcast turned product developer of AoS. You can’t help but feel there is an issue with leaks from GW staff / play-testers / product promoters / factory staff (pull the other one), making their way into this forum, then being reported back to GW via a myriad of routes not just the aforementioned and then subsequently being penalised by GW? Surely the fault lies not with said forum, but the degree of water tightness from GW and the reliability of their various NDA contracts? 

And just to push back on your point, GW is not a small fry, they are one of the largest and most successful companies in the UK. They are quite possibly the largest games manufacturing company in the world. And AoS is not a nich market.

If GW want to shut down sites such as this, because of their own mishandling of information they consider sensitive, who... really... is at fault?

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not about to splurge leaked photos. But the same issue cropped up on an fb page for Necromunda and it went a little like this: 

‘oi don’t ask us to post photos of white dwarf articles with rules on’

’why?’

’cos it infringes copyright?’

’oh really, why is that an issue for you? Do you work for GW, are you a  copyright lawyer?’

AND HERES THE TAKEAWAY

’no, cos someone in this group is a licensed reseller of GW products, which we get at a slight discounted rate, and if GW saw we were condoning posting copyright infringements we’d had have that removed’.

Whicu feels awfully like the criticism often leveled at certain podcasts, which over time have faded from public eye largely although not entirely because of a system of sponsorship from GW. Here’s our product, please review favourably and you will get more. Which, us listeners aren’t blind too and anything approaching journalism, instead turns into being a soapbox for GW.

So, that’s why I ask. Because in a way, this feels like another version, albeit diluted, of that.

By all means promote, create content, hype, community etc for product for our company but don’t reveal or let slip our shortcomings else we’ll remove your privileges. 
 

My point is weak, I get that. It’s just a bugbear, and often case as with warseer, it turns into this silly game with internalised law officers marching around telling people off on behalf of a company they don’t even work for.

 

 

[Aloth_Corfiser]

31 minutes ago, Nezzhil said:

AoS 2.0 was the Endless Spells edition, thanks to the Necroquake and all the stuff.

I think AoS 3.0 will be the Siege edition. All the lore is preparing for big weaponry with the siege of Gordrakk, the war in Eightpoints, the mobilization of the Aelves armies... 

I think so too and I would love it!
This Rumour about a "Ruination Chamber" for Stormcasts has been floating around for some time. Where was it actualy from? Where there some hints in the Lore Texts of the SCE Battletomes?

The Celestial Hurricanum has after all on its Warscroll a special little Rule if the Battle is taking place in Azyr.
Doeas anybody elese think that we will get rules for Azyr in the New GHB 2020?

[Gistradagis]

15 minutes ago, Chikout said:

I think they are too cowardly with the ghbs and change too much with a new edition. A ghb with 20 or so warscroll updates and some allegiance ability changes would be much preferable to a new edition. A new edition feels like going back to square one in the search for a balanced game. 

The problem is that if you need to start fixing factions and rules of the game, it wouldn't be 20 extra pages, but many more. How many factions need updates and overall fixes? Things that come with the army's design and not changing a couple details on a warscroll? Add to that pages with new/different rules.

It becomes an obligatory extra book, and similar to 40k you start needing to buy several books just to play properly. Now, this does beg the question, would that be better or worse? Sure, we'd need more books and it'd be more convoluted, but it could also be better than having several factions become horribly outdated until they finally get an update, then begin anew.

[RuneBrush]

8 hours ago, CommissarRotke said:

Judging by the 9th Edition move to digital content, AOS 3.0 should be following suit. I can only hope there are two separate programming teams to both lighten the load and keep release schedule(s) on time...

Last time I heard anything, there was only one in-house team developing GW's own apps (that includes the paint app too)

2 hours ago, warhammernerd said:

Can someone please explain to me, why a rumour thread on a non-affiliated GW site isn’t allowed to post links to images freely available on the web?  It’s not like the people posting it are breaking laws of any kind, the leaks are already out there not by people on this forum (and even if they were, any breaking of law would be along the lines of NDA’s between staff and GW)?

MOD ANSWER: Two reasons.  Firstly because posting photographs of copyrighted material is actually illegal regardless of where you found it*.  Secondly because it clearly says not to do so in our forum rules which everyone agreed to comply to when they signed up to TGA.

 

* if you look at the front of a GW published book you'll see a bit that says the contents may not be reproduced without prior permission of the publisher

[Overread]

3 hours ago, warhammernerd said:

Can someone please explain to me, why a rumour thread on a non-affiliated GW site isn’t allowed to post links to images freely available on the web?  It’s not like the people posting it are breaking laws of any kind, the leaks are already out there not by people on this forum (and even if they were, any breaking of law would be along the lines of NDA’s between staff and GW)? All I can assume, is that there are people who cruise this site who work for GW, who report back on said activity’s the result of which might lead to this site being sent cease and desist letters? All of which feels a little bit 1984, no? And again, what precisely is the point of a rumours thread then?

Yes, by all means speculate...  but if you happen to ACTUALLY know anything which can be substantiated, please refrain or use strange codified language reminiscent of warseer days, ermmm... yes that costs 12 skaven slaves.

JPR has already given a very comprehensive answer as to why we do it. 
We try our best to protect the copyright of the company that provides and pays for the game and materials that we all come here to enjoy. Thus we do our best to encourage people to read the material first hand in the authentic books in their store/their friends/of their own purchase. 

1 hour ago, Scurvydog said:

The inquisition has already dispatched an agent. Speaking ill of the imperium of man will not be tolerated. The Emperor protects.

Wait this i an AoS forum... 

Yep that means you don't get a visit by the Inquisition - you get a visit by the an assassin sent by Khaine himself*

 

 

*as approved by his Oracle Morathi

[JPjr]

17 minutes ago, warhammernerd said:

Whicu feels awfully like the criticism often leveled at certain podcasts, which over time have faded from public eye largely although not entirely because of a system of sponsorship from GW. Here’s our product, please review favourably and you will get more. Which, us listeners aren’t blind too and anything approaching journalism, instead turns into being a soapbox for GW.

Apologies this is going to be longer (actually much, much, much longer as it turns out) than it has any right to be but it touches on a couple of things I've been thinking about and also it's raining and I'm basically unemployed right now so ****** me what else have I got to do...

Oh Jesus this thing keeps getting longer and longer and it's boring me so I'm covering it up, only read if you really can be bothered...

Spoiler

 

So anyway this will always be an issue in an industry where there are basically 2 companies, WotC and GW, who have what is such an outsize share of the market as to almost have a monopoly on their respective corners of the RPG/wargames hobbies. Standing against that you have almost no established media, certainly not much that isn't actually owned and published by those companies, with enough clout to stand up to them.

If you want to write about these companies products, do so comprehensively and publish those articles at a moment when they will have some relevance (that is on or before release date) then you are dependent on them not only sending you that product but sending it well ahead of release. There's literally no way around this you have to deal with them and be on some kind of good terms with them.

For example recently I've been writing, or trying to write, reviews of RPGs and the like and it is a fundamentally difficult thing to do properly, incredibly hard. For context I've been writing, professionally, on & off for over 20 years now mainly about music, art & culture, video games and comics.

If I'm reviewing an album I will, depending on how much I'm being paid and my word count, listen to it a few times, read any relevant press releases or biographies, maybe listen to some other work by them for context etc then jot down some notes and then bang it out. There's cases where I've written the review literally before the last track has finished and others where I've spent a lot longer trying to really get into it but it's a manageable job, I know I can do it and be paid enough for the time I've spent on it for it to be worthwhile.

Likewise video games, they can take a bit longer to do but in the past I've maybe spent anything from a weekend hammering it to at most a week or so on & off really digging into it but essentially you get the point pretty quickly and know what you're going to say, especially as, in theory, you are experiencing the game the same as everyone else will and as it was intended to be played by the developer.

But RPGs... man it is tough. So to give a game a fair shake I have to read the whole thing, obviously, that could be just 5-10 pages (or less) but it could be a massive 300 page monster of a rule book and I'm then supposed to perfectly understand the rules (which let's face it most people never do). But that's just the start to really properly review it I should, obviously, also play the thing.

Well that means roping in several other people, teaching them and then spending, well how long? One session, that's probably no good, is a Level 1 adventure really a good example of what most DnD play is like? Is reviewing a game based on a one shot fair when its designed to be an open ended campaign etc etc. You could conceivably devote 40 hours plus to just getting a handle on all that, and nowhere is going to pay you enough to make that worth your while if you're doing this professionally. 

So you end up just doing a much more surface level analysis which has its own dilemmas. If things seem off you can criticise it, and that could be justified but could also be unfair on the writers as you might have just misunderstood things or not had a chance to see them properly work in a game.

But then something might seem great at first but only after playing it for ages do you really begin to see the flaws, but your initial review will be up, potentially, for a long time and after thousands of people have put hundreds of hours into the game look dumb AF.

This is especially the case with something like a big box like Indomitus where of course if you're into Warhammer, just opening that up and seeing a huge tonne of awesome plastic is going to get you excited, the models are awesome, it's overwhelmingly a lot of cool stuff to look at, your first surface deep reaction is going to be this is amazing (especially coupled with that feeling of getting something chunky like that for free and before anyone else). 

So I think it's understandable for a lot of, say, wargames reviewers to do little more than excitable unboxings like some kid on Christmas Day, especially as most if not all these people are really just fans, I doubt many consider themselves 'journalists', just someone with a YouTube channel or blog they didn't pay for and aren't paid to do.

We're actually in the process of putting together a small actual print magazine and website (Wyrd Science) devoted to all this (RPGs, wargames etc), hence the writing reviews, and as I said it's a struggle getting the balance right.

What I've gone for so far are heavily caveated versions, which make it very clear that this is just a first look. But honestly it feels very, very unsatisfactory to the point where I'm questioning including them at all and focusing instead on just features, interviews and stories.

As for how GW, say, deals with negative reviews personally I don't know*. Because the power dynamic is so heavily weighted in their favour I can see how it might be tempting for them to not send material out to people who they believe aren't writing about their games fairly (after all if they're releasing it they must on some level, I hope(!), think that it is good) but I don't know for sure, I can also see from the "reviewers" side how even if that threat isn't implicit (or even exists at all) then they might modify their reviews just based on the idea of it.

For some more context here, I actually have worked in PR (music) for most my adult life too, sending out albums for review, trying to arrange interviews, features and the like so I have some tangential experience. Personally I generally don't (or rather didn't, sad unemployed face) knock journalists off a promo list if they wrote a bad review, of course I might not always send them stuff that I think they won't like, that's just common sense, but I never maintained a kind of blacklist unless I thought you were leaking or selling stuff (ahead of release) that I sent.

You just have to recognise that most people in the business are honest, everyone has different tastes and some times what I think is an amazing album will be loathed by someone else. Now I've certainly had clients (record labels or bands) that having seen a bad review** have gone mental and wanted to hit back in all sorts of ways but unless I thought there was something incredibly egregious about the review 99/100 my advice was always, suck it up (but again that comes back to power dynamics, generally speaking a music mag can ****** off a band or even a label as there's hundreds if not thousands more to work with, ****** off GW and well that's that).

****** me, I have bored myself into submission now and can't even remember my original point. I'm not sure I had one, sorry. I should probably just delete this but having spent so long writing it might as well keep it up...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

* let's say yet, just in case their spies are watching, as of course for both professional, personal and financial reasons I'd love to be sent stuff by GW.

** Off topic slightly but this one amuses me. One day I had a band over in the UK to play their first London show just a week after their album came out, I'd been working with them for 6 months at that point, got on really well with them (email, phone, Skype etc) but never met in person. They were all super excited be playing in the UK and in London, and to top it off I knew that NME were reviewing their new album in the issue out that morning.

Of course I picked up a copy before I met them, opened it up and it was a total hatchet job, 1/10 I think. Plus the reviewer got some dumb things wrong, so I was planning on running around all the newsagents near the gig buying up all the copies os the band didn't see it until they'd gone. Of course they get out of their tour van and the lead singer is clutching the mag in his fist, having stopped at the first shop past the Eurotunnel to buy it. 😕

 

 

[warhammernerd]

39 minutes ago, JPjr said:

Apologies this is going to be longer (actually much, much, much longer as it turns out) than it has any right to be but it touches on a couple of things I've been thinking about and also it's raining and I'm basically unemployed right now so ****** me what else have I got to do...

Oh Jesus this thing keeps getting longer and longer and it's boring me so I'm covering it up, only read if you really can be bothered...

  Hide contents

 

So anyway this will always be an issue in an industry where there are basically 2 companies, WotC and GW, who have what is such an outsize share of the market as to almost have a monopoly on their respective corners of the RPG/wargames hobbies. Standing against that you have almost no established media, certainly not much that isn't actually owned and published by those companies, with enough clout to stand up to them.

If you want to write about these companies products, do so comprehensively and publish those articles at a moment when they will have some relevance (that is on or before release date) then you are dependent on them not only sending you that product but sending it well ahead of release. There's literally no way around this you have to deal with them and be on some kind of good terms with them.

For example recently I've been writing, or trying to write, reviews of RPGs and the like and it is a fundamentally difficult thing to do properly, incredibly hard. For context I've been writing, professionally, on & off for over 20 years now mainly about music, art & culture, video games and comics.

If I'm reviewing an album I will, depending on how much I'm being paid and my word count, listen to it a few times, read any relevant press releases or biographies, maybe listen to some other work by them for context etc then jot down some notes and then bang it out. There's cases where I've written the review literally before the last track has finished and others where I've spent a lot longer trying to really get into it but it's a manageable job, I know I can do it and be paid enough for the time I've spent on it for it to be worthwhile.

Likewise video games, they can take a bit longer to do but in the past I've maybe spent anything from a weekend hammering it to at most a week or so on & off really digging into it but essentially you get the point pretty quickly and know what you're going to say, especially as, in theory, you are experiencing the game the same as everyone else will and as it was intended to be played by the developer.

But RPGs... man it is tough. So to give a game a fair shake I have to read the whole thing, obviously, that could be just 5-10 pages (or less) but it could be a massive 300 page monster of a rule book and I'm then supposed to perfectly understand the rules (which let's face it most people never do). But that's just the start to really properly review it I should, obviously, also play the thing.

Well that means roping in several other people, teaching them and then spending, well how long? One session, that's probably no good, is a Level 1 adventure really a good example of what most DnD play is like? Is reviewing a game based on a one shot fair when its designed to be an open ended campaign etc etc. You could conceivably devote 40 hours plus to just getting a handle on all that, and nowhere is going to pay you enough to make that worth your while if you're doing this professionally. 

So you end up just doing a much more surface level analysis which has its own dilemmas. If things seem off you can criticise it, and that could be justified but could also be unfair on the writers as you might have just misunderstood things or not had a chance to see them properly work in a game.

But then something might seem great at first but only after playing it for ages do you really begin to see the flaws, but your initial review will be up, potentially, for a long time and after thousands of people have put hundreds of hours into the game look dumb AF.

This is especially the case with something like a big box like Indomitus where of course if you're into Warhammer, just opening that up and seeing a huge tonne of awesome plastic is going to get you excited, the models are awesome, it's overwhelmingly a lot of cool stuff to look at, your first surface deep reaction is going to be this is amazing (especially coupled with that feeling of getting something chunky like that for free and before anyone else). 

So I think it's understandable for a lot of, say, wargames reviewers to do little more than excitable unboxings like some kid on Christmas Day, especially as most if not all these people are really just fans, I doubt many consider themselves 'journalists', just someone with a YouTube channel or blog they didn't pay for and aren't paid to do.

We're actually in the process of putting together a small actual print magazine and website (Wyrd Science) devoted to all this (RPGs, wargames etc), hence the writing reviews, and as I said it's a struggle getting the balance right.

What I've gone for so far are heavily caveated versions, which make it very clear that this is just a first look. But honestly it feels very, very unsatisfactory to the point where I'm questioning including them at all and focusing instead on just features, interviews and stories.

As for how GW, say, deals with negative reviews personally I don't know*. Because the power dynamic is so heavily weighted in their favour I can see how it might be tempting for them to not send material out to people who they believe aren't writing about their games fairly (after all if they're releasing it they must on some level, I hope(!), think that it is good) but I don't know for sure, I can also see from the "reviewers" side how even if that threat isn't implicit (or even exists at all) then they might modify their reviews just based on the idea of it.

For some more context here, I actually have worked in PR (music) for most my adult life too, sending out albums for review, trying to arrange interviews, features and the like so I have some tangential experience. Personally I generally don't (or rather didn't, sad unemployed face) knock journalists off a promo list if they wrote a bad review, of course I might not always send them stuff that I think they won't like, that's just common sense, but I never maintained a kind of blacklist unless I thought you were leaking or selling stuff (ahead of release) that I sent.

You just have to recognise that most people in the business are honest, everyone has different tastes and some times what I think is an amazing album will be loathed by someone else. Now I've certainly had clients (record labels or bands) that having seen a bad review** have gone mental and wanted to hit back in all sorts of ways but unless I thought there was something incredibly egregious about the review 99/100 my advice was always, suck it up (but again that comes back to power dynamics, generally speaking a music mag can ****** off a band or even a label as there's hundreds if not thousands more to work with, ****** off GW and well that's that).

****** me, I have bored myself into submission now and can't even remember my original point. I'm not sure I had one, sorry. I should probably just delete this but having spent so long writing it might as well keep it up...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

* let's say yet, just in case their spies are watching, as of course for both professional, personal and financial reasons I'd love to be sent stuff by GW.

** Off topic slightly but this one amuses me. One day I had a band over in the UK to play their first London show just a week after their album came out, I'd been working with them for 6 months at that point, got on really well with them (email, phone, Skype etc) but never met in person. They were all super excited be playing in the UK and in London, and to top it off I knew that NME were reviewing their new album in the issue out that morning.

Of course I picked up a copy before I met them, opened it up and it was a total hatchet job, 1/10 I think. Plus the reviewer got some dumb things wrong, so I was planning on running around all the newsagents near the gig buying up all the copies os the band didn't see it until they'd gone. Of course they get out of their tour van and the lead singer is clutching the mag in his fist, having stopped at the first shop past the Eurotunnel to buy it. 😕

 

 

Hero, good answer. Sorry x

[Scurvydog]

29 minutes ago, JPjr said:

Apologies this is going to be longer (actually much, much, much longer as it turns out) than it has any right to be but it touches on a couple of things I've been thinking about and also it's raining and I'm basically unemployed right now so ****** me what else have I got to do...

Oh Jesus this thing keeps getting longer and longer and it's boring me so I'm covering it up, only read if you really can be bothered...

  Reveal hidden contents

 

So anyway this will always be an issue in an industry where there are basically 2 companies, WotC and GW, who have what is such an outsize share of the market as to almost have a monopoly on their respective corners of the RPG/wargames hobbies. Standing against that you have almost no established media, certainly not much that isn't actually owned and published by those companies, with enough clout to stand up to them.

If you want to write about these companies products, do so comprehensively and publish those articles at a moment when they will have some relevance (that is on or before release date) then you are dependent on them not only sending you that product but sending it well ahead of release. There's literally no way around this you have to deal with them and be on some kind of good terms with them.

For example recently I've been writing, or trying to write, reviews of RPGs and the like and it is a fundamentally difficult thing to do properly, incredibly hard. For context I've been writing, professionally, on & off for over 20 years now mainly about music, art & culture, video games and comics.

If I'm reviewing an album I will, depending on how much I'm being paid and my word count, listen to it a few times, read any relevant press releases or biographies, maybe listen to some other work by them for context etc then jot down some notes and then bang it out. There's cases where I've written the review literally before the last track has finished and others where I've spent a lot longer trying to really get into it but it's a manageable job, I know I can do it and be paid enough for the time I've spent on it for it to be worthwhile.

Likewise video games, they can take a bit longer to do but in the past I've maybe spent anything from a weekend hammering it to at most a week or so on & off really digging into it but essentially you get the point pretty quickly and know what you're going to say, especially as, in theory, you are experiencing the game the same as everyone else will and as it was intended to be played by the developer.

But RPGs... man it is tough. So to give a game a fair shake I have to read the whole thing, obviously, that could be just 5-10 pages (or less) but it could be a massive 300 page monster of a rule book and I'm then supposed to perfectly understand the rules (which let's face it most people never do). But that's just the start to really properly review it I should, obviously, also play the thing.

Well that means roping in several other people, teaching them and then spending, well how long? One session, that's probably no good, is a Level 1 adventure really a good example of what most DnD play is like? Is reviewing a game based on a one shot fair when its designed to be an open ended campaign etc etc. You could conceivably devote 40 hours plus to just getting a handle on all that, and nowhere is going to pay you enough to make that worth your while if you're doing this professionally. 

So you end up just doing a much more surface level analysis which has its own dilemmas. If things seem off you can criticise it, and that could be justified but could also be unfair on the writers as you might have just misunderstood things or not had a chance to see them properly work in a game.

But then something might seem great at first but only after playing it for ages do you really begin to see the flaws, but your initial review will be up, potentially, for a long time and after thousands of people have put hundreds of hours into the game look dumb AF.

This is especially the case with something like a big box like Indomitus where of course if you're into Warhammer, just opening that up and seeing a huge tonne of awesome plastic is going to get you excited, the models are awesome, it's overwhelmingly a lot of cool stuff to look at, your first surface deep reaction is going to be this is amazing (especially coupled with that feeling of getting something chunky like that for free and before anyone else). 

So I think it's understandable for a lot of, say, wargames reviewers to do little more than excitable unboxings like some kid on Christmas Day, especially as most if not all these people are really just fans, I doubt many consider themselves 'journalists', just someone with a YouTube channel or blog they didn't pay for and aren't paid to do.

We're actually in the process of putting together a small actual print magazine and website (Wyrd Science) devoted to all this (RPGs, wargames etc), hence the writing reviews, and as I said it's a struggle getting the balance right.

What I've gone for so far are heavily caveated versions, which make it very clear that this is just a first look. But honestly it feels very, very unsatisfactory to the point where I'm questioning including them at all and focusing instead on just features, interviews and stories.

As for how GW, say, deals with negative reviews personally I don't know*. Because the power dynamic is so heavily weighted in their favour I can see how it might be tempting for them to not send material out to people who they believe aren't writing about their games fairly (after all if they're releasing it they must on some level, I hope(!), think that it is good) but I don't know for sure, I can also see from the "reviewers" side how even if that threat isn't implicit (or even exists at all) then they might modify their reviews just based on the idea of it.

For some more context here, I actually have worked in PR (music) for most my adult life too, sending out albums for review, trying to arrange interviews, features and the like so I have some tangential experience. Personally I generally don't (or rather didn't, sad unemployed face) knock journalists off a promo list if they wrote a bad review, of course I might not always send them stuff that I think they won't like, that's just common sense, but I never maintained a kind of blacklist unless I thought you were leaking or selling stuff (ahead of release) that I sent.

You just have to recognise that most people in the business are honest, everyone has different tastes and some times what I think is an amazing album will be loathed by someone else. Now I've certainly had clients (record labels or bands) that having seen a bad review** have gone mental and wanted to hit back in all sorts of ways but unless I thought there was something incredibly egregious about the review 99/100 my advice was always, suck it up (but again that comes back to power dynamics, generally speaking a music mag can ****** off a band or even a label as there's hundreds if not thousands more to work with, ****** off GW and well that's that).

****** me, I have bored myself into submission now and can't even remember my original point. I'm not sure I had one, sorry. I should probably just delete this but having spent so long writing it might as well keep it up...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

* let's say yet, just in case their spies are watching, as of course for both professional, personal and financial reasons I'd love to be sent stuff by GW.

** Off topic slightly but this one amuses me. One day I had a band over in the UK to play their first London show just a week after their album came out, I'd been working with them for 6 months at that point, got on really well with them (email, phone, Skype etc) but never met in person. They were all super excited be playing in the UK and in London, and to top it off I knew that NME were reviewing their new album in the issue out that morning.

Of course I picked up a copy before I met them, opened it up and it was a total hatchet job, 1/10 I think. Plus the reviewer got some dumb things wrong, so I was planning on running around all the newsagents near the gig buying up all the copies os the band didn't see it until they'd gone. Of course they get out of their tour van and the lead singer is clutching the mag in his fist, having stopped at the first shop past the Eurotunnel to buy it. 😕

 

 

This covers access journalism in general, which is now much more important than, well, actual journalism. Everything moves so fast, that who has it first gets the views, attention and as such revenue. Few people stop to think if the media showcasing a product first, will in doing so also sacrifice the time and effort needed for any kind of true critical analysis. 

I can't even claim to not be part of the problem, as I eagerly await the next "man reads book" and becoming annoyed this is not happening now for the GHB2020, which really showcases the difference of GW supporting this or not. Not a single of the regulars have been showcasing the book on youtube or similar, while everyone seems to have indomitus boxes which are not even up for preorder yet and even longer to release.

Hopefully GW can keep their nose clean and not become what we are seeing now from Sony and Naughty Dog in relation to TloU 2 reviews, what an absolute dumpsterfire that is, and a travesty really, as companies can by extention be holding peoples revenuestream hostage and begin enforcing strict prerelease NDAs for reviews and worse things.

It is very rare to see any fans doing reviews like 2/10 do not buy for new GW miniatures for example, and I also have no reason to believe GW is intentionally doing their prereleases with nefarious intentions. 

I do think it is a universal problem though and dillutes proper journalism, criticism and thoroughness and very few can get away with not riding the access wagan. I can mostly name people from the gaming world, such as Angry Joe, where people still give him a lot of traffic, even though a game might have been out a week or more before his content is available. It does however require far to achieve this and probably almost impossible to start out like that for any content creator.

Separating access journalism and leaks for a second, I do also just find leak hunting "fun", it can for sure cause issues (for those who cant cope with things being out of context), but for anyone else it can be fun to look at and wonder.

[Charly2912]

Back to rumours pls instead of those boring discussions about Leaks in general  

[EccentricCircle]

2 hours ago, JPjr said:

Apologies this is going to be longer (actually much, much, much longer as it turns out) than it has any right to be but it touches on a couple of things I've been thinking about and also it's raining and I'm basically unemployed right now so ****** me what else have I got to do...

Oh Jesus this thing keeps getting longer and longer and it's boring me so I'm covering it up, only read if you really can be bothered...

  Hide contents

 

So anyway this will always be an issue in an industry where there are basically 2 companies, WotC and GW, who have what is such an outsize share of the market as to almost have a monopoly on their respective corners of the RPG/wargames hobbies. Standing against that you have almost no established media, certainly not much that isn't actually owned and published by those companies, with enough clout to stand up to them.

If you want to write about these companies products, do so comprehensively and publish those articles at a moment when they will have some relevance (that is on or before release date) then you are dependent on them not only sending you that product but sending it well ahead of release. There's literally no way around this you have to deal with them and be on some kind of good terms with them.

For example recently I've been writing, or trying to write, reviews of RPGs and the like and it is a fundamentally difficult thing to do properly, incredibly hard. For context I've been writing, professionally, on & off for over 20 years now mainly about music, art & culture, video games and comics.

If I'm reviewing an album I will, depending on how much I'm being paid and my word count, listen to it a few times, read any relevant press releases or biographies, maybe listen to some other work by them for context etc then jot down some notes and then bang it out. There's cases where I've written the review literally before the last track has finished and others where I've spent a lot longer trying to really get into it but it's a manageable job, I know I can do it and be paid enough for the time I've spent on it for it to be worthwhile.

Likewise video games, they can take a bit longer to do but in the past I've maybe spent anything from a weekend hammering it to at most a week or so on & off really digging into it but essentially you get the point pretty quickly and know what you're going to say, especially as, in theory, you are experiencing the game the same as everyone else will and as it was intended to be played by the developer.

But RPGs... man it is tough. So to give a game a fair shake I have to read the whole thing, obviously, that could be just 5-10 pages (or less) but it could be a massive 300 page monster of a rule book and I'm then supposed to perfectly understand the rules (which let's face it most people never do). But that's just the start to really properly review it I should, obviously, also play the thing.

Well that means roping in several other people, teaching them and then spending, well how long? One session, that's probably no good, is a Level 1 adventure really a good example of what most DnD play is like? Is reviewing a game based on a one shot fair when its designed to be an open ended campaign etc etc. You could conceivably devote 40 hours plus to just getting a handle on all that, and nowhere is going to pay you enough to make that worth your while if you're doing this professionally. 

So you end up just doing a much more surface level analysis which has its own dilemmas. If things seem off you can criticise it, and that could be justified but could also be unfair on the writers as you might have just misunderstood things or not had a chance to see them properly work in a game.

But then something might seem great at first but only after playing it for ages do you really begin to see the flaws, but your initial review will be up, potentially, for a long time and after thousands of people have put hundreds of hours into the game look dumb AF.

This is especially the case with something like a big box like Indomitus where of course if you're into Warhammer, just opening that up and seeing a huge tonne of awesome plastic is going to get you excited, the models are awesome, it's overwhelmingly a lot of cool stuff to look at, your first surface deep reaction is going to be this is amazing (especially coupled with that feeling of getting something chunky like that for free and before anyone else). 

So I think it's understandable for a lot of, say, wargames reviewers to do little more than excitable unboxings like some kid on Christmas Day, especially as most if not all these people are really just fans, I doubt many consider themselves 'journalists', just someone with a YouTube channel or blog they didn't pay for and aren't paid to do.

We're actually in the process of putting together a small actual print magazine and website (Wyrd Science) devoted to all this (RPGs, wargames etc), hence the writing reviews, and as I said it's a struggle getting the balance right.

What I've gone for so far are heavily caveated versions, which make it very clear that this is just a first look. But honestly it feels very, very unsatisfactory to the point where I'm questioning including them at all and focusing instead on just features, interviews and stories.

As for how GW, say, deals with negative reviews personally I don't know*. Because the power dynamic is so heavily weighted in their favour I can see how it might be tempting for them to not send material out to people who they believe aren't writing about their games fairly (after all if they're releasing it they must on some level, I hope(!), think that it is good) but I don't know for sure, I can also see from the "reviewers" side how even if that threat isn't implicit (or even exists at all) then they might modify their reviews just based on the idea of it.

For some more context here, I actually have worked in PR (music) for most my adult life too, sending out albums for review, trying to arrange interviews, features and the like so I have some tangential experience. Personally I generally don't (or rather didn't, sad unemployed face) knock journalists off a promo list if they wrote a bad review, of course I might not always send them stuff that I think they won't like, that's just common sense, but I never maintained a kind of blacklist unless I thought you were leaking or selling stuff (ahead of release) that I sent.

You just have to recognise that most people in the business are honest, everyone has different tastes and some times what I think is an amazing album will be loathed by someone else. Now I've certainly had clients (record labels or bands) that having seen a bad review** have gone mental and wanted to hit back in all sorts of ways but unless I thought there was something incredibly egregious about the review 99/100 my advice was always, suck it up (but again that comes back to power dynamics, generally speaking a music mag can ****** off a band or even a label as there's hundreds if not thousands more to work with, ****** off GW and well that's that).

****** me, I have bored myself into submission now and can't even remember my original point. I'm not sure I had one, sorry. I should probably just delete this but having spent so long writing it might as well keep it up...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

* let's say yet, just in case their spies are watching, as of course for both professional, personal and financial reasons I'd love to be sent stuff by GW.

** Off topic slightly but this one amuses me. One day I had a band over in the UK to play their first London show just a week after their album came out, I'd been working with them for 6 months at that point, got on really well with them (email, phone, Skype etc) but never met in person. They were all super excited be playing in the UK and in London, and to top it off I knew that NME were reviewing their new album in the issue out that morning.

Of course I picked up a copy before I met them, opened it up and it was a total hatchet job, 1/10 I think. Plus the reviewer got some dumb things wrong, so I was planning on running around all the newsagents near the gig buying up all the copies os the band didn't see it until they'd gone. Of course they get out of their tour van and the lead singer is clutching the mag in his fist, having stopped at the first shop past the Eurotunnel to buy it. 😕

 

 

A bit off topic, but I find the best RPG reviews really are the ones which come from folks who have been playing a while, and know the games really well. In fact "retro reviews" of older products can be really fun in that respect. Sure its not the new hotness, but because stuff holds its value in a tabletop gaming sphere  a review of "this is what warhammer used to look like" or "have you seen these old D&D books, look how crazy they were, but here are the gems of good stuff" work really well.

Have you thought about teaming up with existing players to get their opinions on things, whether through interviews, or guest articles? or would that be tricky with your business model?

[Chikout]

3 hours ago, Gistradagis said:

The problem is that if you need to start fixing factions and rules of the game, it wouldn't be 20 extra pages, but many more. How many factions need updates and overall fixes? Things that come with the army's design and not changing a couple details on a warscroll? Add to that pages with new/different rules.

It becomes an obligatory extra book, and similar to 40k you start needing to buy several books just to play properly. Now, this does beg the question, would that be better or worse? Sure, we'd need more books and it'd be more convoluted, but it could also be better than having several factions become horribly outdated until they finally get an update, then begin anew.

The ghb is already an obligatory extra book. They are already putting out PDFs of FAQs which people need to download. I genuinely think minor edits to about 20 or so outlying warscrolls on either end of the scale and changes to 4 allegiance  or subfraction abilities would leave the game in a very good place going forward. 

The thing I worry about with a  new edition is that they tend to introduce a lot of variables which makes the game different rather than refining it. The mess with stacking command abilities is a good example of a major problem that second edition introduced. 

[JPjr]

7 minutes ago, EccentricCircle said:

A bit off topic, but I find the best RPG reviews really are the ones which come from folks who have been playing a while, and know the games really well. In fact "retro reviews" of older products can be really fun in that respect. Sure its not the new hotness, but because stuff holds its value in a tabletop gaming sphere  a review of "this is what warhammer used to look like" or "have you seen these old D&D books, look how crazy they were, but here are the gems of good stuff" work really well.

Have you thought about teaming up with existing players to get their opinions on things, whether through interviews, or guest articles? or would that be tricky with your business model?

I shall endeavour to keep this brief*, for once, as I'd hate to take up space reserved for all the genuine rumours we get here...

Spoiler

 

But yes I fully agree to your first point. RPGs and indeed wargames can be both incredibly complicated to play and get your head around and of course very subjective experiences. As you say experience is incredibly important, these games don't reveal themselves all at once and often build upon conventions that might be years (if not decades) in the making. If you want a purely mechanical breakdown of a game then it's doable but it'll be incredibly dry and even then I think only tell half the story.

And that's the other thing the FIFA game I play on the Xbox is to all intents and purposes the same that everyone else plays but think how many variables there are with our hobbies, and how many of them are completely outside the control of the games writers/developers, whom your actually playing with being the most obvious example I can think of, or how a game on a beautiful table, full of incredible scenery with wonderfully painted models is a completely different experience to a load of grey plastic charging through a kitchen table wasteland.

That does make reviewing older games fun and potentially useful, and in fact for the website one of the sections will be called 'The Vault' where we play and review a much older game. Though tbh a good part of this is me trying to come up with an excuse for my ridiculous drunk eBay habits and pathetic longing to buy and play all the games from the 80s/early 90s I once owned.

But I'm not sure that works as more than an occasional fun thing and certainly in the print mag I think would be taking up space that personally I'd prefer to use to champion someone working today.

As for your 2nd point about teaming up with people, I've so far pulled together about 4 or 5 other writers, whose work I really like and who are into all this stuff and I'm working with them to come up with various feature ideas and interviews. It's tricky though as I want to be able to pay them, as they are, in the main, proper journalists or writers and they deserve to be paid but frankly there's a more than likely chance that this could just be a horrific money pit so I'm having to be a bit careful which is making everything take longer than I'd normally like, especially as most of this was being paid for through my income from my now non existent job.

On yet another tangent the really tricky thing has been coming up with wargaming content for it, there's a lot more scope for interesting features around RPGs, just so many more indie writers producing so much more stuff to use as pegs for features. I've found but wargaming's a bit trickier but anyway hopefully in the next month the website at least will be live and then the mag to follow after summer.

 

* LOL failed again...

[El Antiguo Guardián]

I think that AoS 3.0. will came next year, with stormcast new chamber vs new destruction army (probably normal goblins).

And before, lumineth, SOB, Khaine and Vampires, maybe even nurgle and idoneth. Probably two waves: vampires vs khaine and nurgle vs idoneth.

Let´s see. 

[Skreech Verminking]

33 minutes ago, El Antiguo Guardián said:

I think that AoS 3.0. will came next year, with stormcast new chamber vs new destruction army (probably normal goblins).

And before, lumineth, SOB, Khaine and Vampires, maybe even nurgle and idoneth. Probably two waves: vampires vs khaine and nurgle vs idoneth.

Let´s see. 

...or wouldn’t a boxset with like skaven vs. Beast of chaos or orruks in total be more interesting for a new edition?

I mean these are army that direly in need of an update in new models or just need new units, and Sigmarines aren’t really one of them when it comes down to models.

They are more in need of an overall warcsroll update, rather then one in models

 

[Fairbanks]

3 hours ago, JPjr said:

Apologies this is going to be longer (actually much, much, much longer as it turns out) than it has any right to be but it touches on a couple of things I've been thinking about and also it's raining and I'm basically unemployed right now so ****** me what else have I got to do...

Oh Jesus this thing keeps getting longer and longer and it's boring me so I'm covering it up, only read if you really can be bothered...

  Reveal hidden contents

 

So anyway this will always be an issue in an industry where there are basically 2 companies, WotC and GW, who have what is such an outsize share of the market as to almost have a monopoly on their respective corners of the RPG/wargames hobbies. Standing against that you have almost no established media, certainly not much that isn't actually owned and published by those companies, with enough clout to stand up to them.

If you want to write about these companies products, do so comprehensively and publish those articles at a moment when they will have some relevance (that is on or before release date) then you are dependent on them not only sending you that product but sending it well ahead of release. There's literally no way around this you have to deal with them and be on some kind of good terms with them.

For example recently I've been writing, or trying to write, reviews of RPGs and the like and it is a fundamentally difficult thing to do properly, incredibly hard. For context I've been writing, professionally, on & off for over 20 years now mainly about music, art & culture, video games and comics.

If I'm reviewing an album I will, depending on how much I'm being paid and my word count, listen to it a few times, read any relevant press releases or biographies, maybe listen to some other work by them for context etc then jot down some notes and then bang it out. There's cases where I've written the review literally before the last track has finished and others where I've spent a lot longer trying to really get into it but it's a manageable job, I know I can do it and be paid enough for the time I've spent on it for it to be worthwhile.

Likewise video games, they can take a bit longer to do but in the past I've maybe spent anything from a weekend hammering it to at most a week or so on & off really digging into it but essentially you get the point pretty quickly and know what you're going to say, especially as, in theory, you are experiencing the game the same as everyone else will and as it was intended to be played by the developer.

But RPGs... man it is tough. So to give a game a fair shake I have to read the whole thing, obviously, that could be just 5-10 pages (or less) but it could be a massive 300 page monster of a rule book and I'm then supposed to perfectly understand the rules (which let's face it most people never do). But that's just the start to really properly review it I should, obviously, also play the thing.

Well that means roping in several other people, teaching them and then spending, well how long? One session, that's probably no good, is a Level 1 adventure really a good example of what most DnD play is like? Is reviewing a game based on a one shot fair when its designed to be an open ended campaign etc etc. You could conceivably devote 40 hours plus to just getting a handle on all that, and nowhere is going to pay you enough to make that worth your while if you're doing this professionally. 

So you end up just doing a much more surface level analysis which has its own dilemmas. If things seem off you can criticise it, and that could be justified but could also be unfair on the writers as you might have just misunderstood things or not had a chance to see them properly work in a game.

But then something might seem great at first but only after playing it for ages do you really begin to see the flaws, but your initial review will be up, potentially, for a long time and after thousands of people have put hundreds of hours into the game look dumb AF.

This is especially the case with something like a big box like Indomitus where of course if you're into Warhammer, just opening that up and seeing a huge tonne of awesome plastic is going to get you excited, the models are awesome, it's overwhelmingly a lot of cool stuff to look at, your first surface deep reaction is going to be this is amazing (especially coupled with that feeling of getting something chunky like that for free and before anyone else). 

So I think it's understandable for a lot of, say, wargames reviewers to do little more than excitable unboxings like some kid on Christmas Day, especially as most if not all these people are really just fans, I doubt many consider themselves 'journalists', just someone with a YouTube channel or blog they didn't pay for and aren't paid to do.

We're actually in the process of putting together a small actual print magazine and website (Wyrd Science) devoted to all this (RPGs, wargames etc), hence the writing reviews, and as I said it's a struggle getting the balance right.

What I've gone for so far are heavily caveated versions, which make it very clear that this is just a first look. But honestly it feels very, very unsatisfactory to the point where I'm questioning including them at all and focusing instead on just features, interviews and stories.

As for how GW, say, deals with negative reviews personally I don't know*. Because the power dynamic is so heavily weighted in their favour I can see how it might be tempting for them to not send material out to people who they believe aren't writing about their games fairly (after all if they're releasing it they must on some level, I hope(!), think that it is good) but I don't know for sure, I can also see from the "reviewers" side how even if that threat isn't implicit (or even exists at all) then they might modify their reviews just based on the idea of it.

For some more context here, I actually have worked in PR (music) for most my adult life too, sending out albums for review, trying to arrange interviews, features and the like so I have some tangential experience. Personally I generally don't (or rather didn't, sad unemployed face) knock journalists off a promo list if they wrote a bad review, of course I might not always send them stuff that I think they won't like, that's just common sense, but I never maintained a kind of blacklist unless I thought you were leaking or selling stuff (ahead of release) that I sent.

You just have to recognise that most people in the business are honest, everyone has different tastes and some times what I think is an amazing album will be loathed by someone else. Now I've certainly had clients (record labels or bands) that having seen a bad review** have gone mental and wanted to hit back in all sorts of ways but unless I thought there was something incredibly egregious about the review 99/100 my advice was always, suck it up (but again that comes back to power dynamics, generally speaking a music mag can ****** off a band or even a label as there's hundreds if not thousands more to work with, ****** off GW and well that's that).

****** me, I have bored myself into submission now and can't even remember my original point. I'm not sure I had one, sorry. I should probably just delete this but having spent so long writing it might as well keep it up...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

* let's say yet, just in case their spies are watching, as of course for both professional, personal and financial reasons I'd love to be sent stuff by GW.

** Off topic slightly but this one amuses me. One day I had a band over in the UK to play their first London show just a week after their album came out, I'd been working with them for 6 months at that point, got on really well with them (email, phone, Skype etc) but never met in person. They were all super excited be playing in the UK and in London, and to top it off I knew that NME were reviewing their new album in the issue out that morning.

Of course I picked up a copy before I met them, opened it up and it was a total hatchet job, 1/10 I think. Plus the reviewer got some dumb things wrong, so I was planning on running around all the newsagents near the gig buying up all the copies os the band didn't see it until they'd gone. Of course they get out of their tour van and the lead singer is clutching the mag in his fist, having stopped at the first shop past the Eurotunnel to buy it. 😕

 

 

Can you make another thread? I’d love to comment on something like this, but the Rumor Thread isn’t really the place.

Not to mention this Thread is already long enough. In all seriousness, why don’t we have a Rumor Mill Thread Category?

[El Antiguo Guardián]

6 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

...or wouldn’t a boxset with like skaven vs. Beast of chaos or orruks in total be more interesting for a new edition?

I mean these are army that direly in need of an update in new models or just need new units, and Sigmarines aren’t really one of them when it comes down to models.

They are more in need of an overall warcsroll update, rather then one in models

 

Os course, I prefer another boxed sets, but stormcast are like space marines, so...

[KingBrodd]

5 hours ago, Nezzhil said:

AoS 2.0 was the Endless Spells edition, thanks to the Necroquake and all the stuff.

I think AoS 3.0 will be the Siege edition. All the lore is preparing for big weaponry with the siege of Gordrakk, the war in Eightpoints, the mobilization of the Aelves armies... 

With some Siege rules being placed in Wrath of the Everchosen I thinn you're correct about 3.0 being Siege Central. Gordrraks Waaagh would be the perfect place to start especially if it's against Excelsis (I think Azyr will come later) and the addition of the Mega Gargants at this point is too well timed. Hell one of my lads is called the Gatebreaker for a reason!!

32 minutes ago, Skreech Verminking said:

...or wouldn’t a boxset with like skaven vs. Beast of chaos or orruks in total be more interesting for a new edition?

I mean these are army that direly in need of an update in new models or just need new units, and Sigmarines aren’t really one of them when it comes down to models.

They are more in need of an overall warcsroll update, rather then one in models

 

Mate if they do Skaven VS Orruks or Beasts of Chaos as the new starter or a Battlebox in general that would be incredible. I'd love to see updated sculpts of Gors and Rat Ogors. Hell update just about every Skaven mini while your at it.

Edited July 10, 2020 by KingBrodd

[Skreech Verminking]

25 minutes ago, El Antiguo Guardián said:

Os course, I prefer another boxed sets, but stormcast are like space marines, so...

I don’t know!

at a certain point it’ll just repeat itself with units that function the same.

in the end stormcast will be overloaded with a ton of models, which only 2-3 units and 2-5heroes might see play and everything else may be considered dead, since the cost as mich as these nw models that do exactly the same thing but are better.

overhauling rules and warscrolls would be mich better for the stormcast then giving them another loud of too shiny not yet dead-things.

and the hate for them would be less (probably not sure though).

And models that haven’t seen an update for the last 20-30Years will definitely thank gw for it, if they choose a different path this time

 

Just now, KingBrodd said:

 

Mate if they do Skaven VS Orruks or Beasts of Chaos as the new starter or a Battlebox in general that would be incredible. I'd love to see updated sculpts of Gors and Rat Ogors. Hell update just about every Skaven mini while your at it.

It would be great sadly these are only wishes, Hopes and dreams, and Only Gw or a ridiculously mad (skaven) community can decrypt the code of what the future beholds.