The Rumour Thread

[Luperci]

36 minutes ago, Tonhel said:

Which didn't do much for Realm of Ruins. Released november 2023 I think and I have seen sales with a 75-90% discount. The Old World and Age of Sigmar are not different enough in aesthetics / gameplay to make a Total War AoS game. The difference between Warhammer I-III will be small and it will probably have a huge backslash from Warhammer die hards that would rather see more expansions for Warhammer III.

40K is a very different beast. If they make the battles work it will be a huge succes.

many 40k games haven't done well either and no one would make the argument that 40k is a weak IP. GW just need to be more selective about which studios they let use their IP imo

[KingBrodd]

New Rat Ogors lets go!! Cant wait to see them revealed. The classic metal minis and Island of Blood Rat Ogors are beautiful and the current plastic kit is honestly tied for me with the Ogor Butcher as the ugliest minis GW currently produces.

[novakai]

Just now, Luperci said:

many 40k games haven't done well either and no one would make the argument that 40k is a weak IP. GW just need to be more selective about which studios they let use their IP imo

I think the issues is weaker studio are more willing to take the license then Studio that are semi decent or know what your doing.

since 40K is a Strong IP, more competent studio like Owlcat are willing to express interest in making games for 40K. Of course there studio like Sabre interactive who developing the new Space marine game that I am also iffy about since they been sketchy as well.

 

[ScionOfOssia]

I think part of 3rd Edition’s problems was that, with relative certainty, I don’t think anyone actually cared about Kragnos even a fraction as much as Nagash, who headlined the prior edition. He’s a fairly nothing character with no development, doesn’t offer even fractionally the same raw strength of personality that Nagash has, and his end goals are largely ill-defined and he doesn’t have any real plans on how to achieve them, something that Gordrakk, Skagrott, and Brodd had far fewer issues with. 

Basically, Kragnos shouldn’t have headlined- One of the others should have. 

[novakai]

Just now, ScionOfOssia said:

I think part of 3rd Edition’s problems was that, with relative certainty, I don’t think anyone actually cared about Kragnos even a fraction as much as Nagash, who headlined the prior edition. He’s a fairly nothing character with no development, doesn’t offer even fractionally the same raw strength of personality that Nagash has, and his end goals are largely ill-defined and he doesn’t have any real plans on how to achieve them, something that Gordrakk, Skagrott, and Brodd had far fewer issues with. 

Basically, Kragnos shouldn’t have headlined- One of the others should have. 

That or the Dawnbringer crusade should have happen right away instead of 2 years later when the edition was about to end

[PraetorDragoon]

2 minutes ago, ScionOfOssia said:

I think part of 3rd Edition’s problems was that, with relative certainty, I don’t think anyone actually cared about Kragnos even a fraction as much as Nagash, who headlined the prior edition. He’s a fairly nothing character with no development, doesn’t offer even fractionally the same raw strength of personality that Nagash has, and his end goals are largely ill-defined and he doesn’t have any real plans on how to achieve them, something that Gordrakk, Skagrott, and Brodd had far fewer issues with. 

Basically, Kragnos shouldn’t have headlined- One of the others should have. 

Did Kragnos even headline the 3e? What did he even do?

[BarakUrbaz]

2 minutes ago, PraetorDragoon said:

Did Kragnos even headline the 3e? What did he even do?

Its more like Kragnos existence just passively causes everyone to get pissed off. 

[CommissarRotke]

1 hour ago, novakai said:

I don’t think they want to do an AoS game. They seem disinterested in it.

and Rumors from some TW peeps suggest it’s going to be 40K TW game next. They going to develop a new engine to make it work.

Well that's stupid, sorry. AOS would allow them to try out semi-RNG maps with an open design space... allowing them to build off of their proven strengths while taking small risks for new mechanics. 40k is not going to fit into the Total War formula at all. it will either be too small of a scale or be 3 mediocre, buggy games in a trenchcoat.

• Fantasy/historicals ALREADY have an issue with artillery (and flyers) giving you a huge advantage.
• you'd need an entire cover system to ensure infantry can do ANYTHING at all, but people will also complain if the "big toys" that make infantry entirely obsolete aren't included.
• CA took naval battles out of their games for a reason, but people will complain if there's not some kind of space combat.
• The Imperium would either be a disappointing One Giant Tentpole Faction or a gamebreaking 3-4 linked factions, where it dictates the entirety of each game: an AI imperium isn't allying with Xenos, and certainly will get aggro at anyone allying with Xenos. And people WILL complain if their Imperium faction isn't in the game, so we're looking at a minimum of 4 (IG, SoB, SM, AM).
• If they do one planet, it would have to awkwardly force whatever included factions into a small area like Dark Crusade did, but since that would also have to be an active warzone it leaves the game with no opportunities for non-conquest victory conditions and little design space for non-combat buildings/cities, let alone landmarks.
• If they do a sector, they'd have to figure out how to make planetary invasions engaging, and they are STILL struggling with making sieges fun. And even after an invasion, do you have multiple land battles on a planet and THEN a siege? When do you even have the regular field battles that Total War is beloved for?
• How does a city siege in 40k even work, with massive gun emplacements and massive vehicles? what is the scale here? what are your infantry even doing aside from being vaporized? Total War Towers are already OP without them being a scifi Maginot Line.
• If they do the actual galaxy, at what point are they just peeking at Stellaris' homework to make their game? I don't play Total War for galactic combat, I play a 4X game for that.

I really think forcing 40k into the Total War formula is a horrible decision, but I guess we'll find out what CA wants after TWW3. I just hope there is something revealed for AOS games.

[CommissarRotke]

1 hour ago, Ejecutor said:

I literally thought about it when a few posts ago there was a chat about how poor the AoS map is defined. How are you going to create an AoS TWW without that? I thought it would be impossible or very limited.

Skill Issue tbqh. GW worked with CA to create two entire factions from obscure WHF lore. Why wouldn't GW consult with them for the Mortal Realm maps?

[CommissarRotke]

1 hour ago, novakai said:

If it was true would see more developers wanting to buy the License to make AoS video game. you also have to account that 40K maybe the Primier product that hoist GW into becoming top dog and not so much the other products.

like I am not really seeing AoS grow or branch out into other media outside of the TT space. It is extremely lacking.
 

If I wanted to be pediatric I can state that AoS fallen off the second place mark last year in some polls and data that have said they where second place years ago too

And why is it the fault of AOS itself? Could it not be the real anti-AOS bias we talk about here, that keeps developers away from the license? Or GW itself not actually utilizing their license?

1 hour ago, Tonhel said:

Which didn't do much for Realm of Ruins. Released november 2023 I think and I have seen sales with a 75-90% discount. The Old World and Age of Sigmar are not different enough in aesthetics / gameplay to make a Total War AoS game. The difference between Warhammer I-III will be small and it will probably have a huge backslash from Warhammer die hards that would rather see more expansions for Warhammer III.

40K is a very different beast. If they make the battles work it will be a huge succes.

by that logic, why make Total Warhammer when fantasy is similar enough to historical Total Wars? There can be different fantasy games like there are different historical games.

1 hour ago, Vasshpit said:

Is Realms of Ruin really that bad?...

My rig won't  run it and I don't own any consoles but it looks decent enough. I'll definitely try it out when I do have a better pc. 

it's not, it is a solid RTS with a unique campaign. A little repetitive because of the limited launch roster, but RTS as a genre is repetitive in general. The skill you build in them is based on repeating matches with your favorite faction(s), whether with AI or in multiplayer.

[Tonhel]

6 minutes ago, CommissarRotke said:

Well that's stupid, sorry. AOS would allow them to try out semi-RNG maps with an open design space... allowing them to build off of their proven strengths while taking small risks for new mechanics. 40k is not going to fit into the Total War formula at all. it will either be too small of a scale or be 3 mediocre, buggy games in a trenchcoat.

• Fantasy/historicals ALREADY have an issue with artillery (and flyers) giving you a huge advantage.
• you'd need an entire cover system to ensure infantry can do ANYTHING at all, but people will also complain if the "big toys" that make infantry entirely obsolete aren't included.
• CA took naval battles out of their games for a reason, but people will complain if there's not some kind of space combat.
• The Imperium would either be a disappointing One Giant Tentpole Faction or a gamebreaking 3-4 linked factions, where it dictates the entirety of each game: an AI imperium isn't allying with Xenos, and certainly will get aggro at anyone allying with Xenos. And people WILL complain if their Imperium faction isn't in the game, so we're looking at a minimum of 4 (IG, SoB, SM, AM).
• If they do one planet, it would have to awkwardly force whatever included factions into a small area like Dark Crusade did, but since that would also have to be an active warzone it leaves the game with no opportunities for non-conquest victory conditions and little design space for non-combat buildings/cities, let alone landmarks.
• If they do a sector, they'd have to figure out how to make planetary invasions engaging, and they are STILL struggling with making sieges fun. And even after an invasion, do you have multiple land battles on a planet and THEN a siege? When do you even have the regular field battles that Total War is beloved for?
• How does a city siege in 40k even work, with massive gun emplacements and massive vehicles? what is the scale here? what are your infantry even doing aside from being vaporized? Total War Towers are already OP without them being a scifi Maginot Line.
• If they do the actual galaxy, at what point are they just peeking at Stellaris' homework to make their game? I don't play Total War for galactic combat, I play a 4X game for that.

I really think forcing 40k into the Total War formula is a horrible decision, but I guess we'll find out what CA wants after TWW3. I just hope there is something revealed for AOS games.

I agree with your points. After Warhammer III it is time time for Medieval Total War 3. Lol, I would also be very happy with a Medieval Total War 2 Remastered.

It seems that The Thrones of Decay expansion is a huge succes. So I hope and expect that Warhammer III still isn't finished.

[novakai]

12 minutes ago, CommissarRotke said:

Well that's stupid, sorry. AOS would allow them to try out semi-RNG maps with an open design space... allowing them to build off of their proven strengths while taking small risks for new mechanics. 40k is not going to fit into the Total War formula at all. it will either be too small of a scale or be 3 mediocre, buggy games in a trenchcoat.

• Fantasy/historicals ALREADY have an issue with artillery (and flyers) giving you a huge advantage.
• you'd need an entire cover system to ensure infantry can do ANYTHING at all, but people will also complain if the "big toys" that make infantry entirely obsolete aren't included.
• CA took naval battles out of their games for a reason, but people will complain if there's not some kind of space combat.
• The Imperium would either be a disappointing One Giant Tentpole Faction or a gamebreaking 3-4 linked factions, where it dictates the entirety of each game: an AI imperium isn't allying with Xenos, and certainly will get aggro at anyone allying with Xenos. And people WILL complain if their Imperium faction isn't in the game, so we're looking at a minimum of 4 (IG, SoB, SM, AM).
• If they do one planet, it would have to awkwardly force whatever included factions into a small area like Dark Crusade did, but since that would also have to be an active warzone it leaves the game with no opportunities for non-conquest victory conditions and little design space for non-combat buildings/cities, let alone landmarks.
• If they do a sector, they'd have to figure out how to make planetary invasions engaging, and they are STILL struggling with making sieges fun. And even after an invasion, do you have multiple land battles on a planet and THEN a siege? When do you even have the regular field battles that Total War is beloved for?
• How does a city siege in 40k even work, with massive gun emplacements and massive vehicles? what is the scale here? what are your infantry even doing aside from being vaporized? Total War Towers are already OP without them being a scifi Maginot Line.
• If they do the actual galaxy, at what point are they just peeking at Stellaris' homework to make their game? I don't play Total War for galactic combat, I play a 4X game for that.

I really think forcing 40k into the Total War formula is a horrible decision, but I guess we'll find out what CA wants after TWW3. I just hope there is something revealed for AOS games.

I mean it the big rumor going around in TW right now and some content creator are extremely sure it’s happening over AoS 

they are apparently develop a new engine that will make 40K combat work with the TW formula as well as use it for the next big historical title.

Edited May 14 by novakai

[novakai]

Just now, Tonhel said:

I agree with your points. After Warhammer III it is time time for Medieval Total War 3. Lol, I would also be very happy with a Medieval Total War 2 Remastered.

It seems that The Thrones of Decay expansion is a huge succes. So I hope and expect that Warhammer III still isn't finished.

According to Legend of total war. It about 1 more year of content left for game 3

[ScionOfOssia]

15 minutes ago, PraetorDragoon said:

Did Kragnos even headline the 3e? What did he even do?

He should’ve filled a narrative role similar to Nagash in 2nd, but it turned out that that wound up getting filled by the Dawnbringer Crusades which yes, nova is right, should’ve been launched way earlier. Kragnos should’ve been the side story. 

[CommissarRotke]

3 minutes ago, novakai said:

I mean it the big rumor going around in TW right now and some content creator are extremely sure it’s happening over AoS 

I've heard that as well, I still think CA's resources are best put towards another historical like @Tonhel said or another fantasy IP. I feel it in my bones that a 40k Total War would get an extremely mixed reception. The scale does not fit into the TW style.

[Tonhel]

8 minutes ago, CommissarRotke said:

by that logic, why make Total Warhammer when fantasy is similar enough to historical Total Wars? There can be different fantasy games like there are different historical games.

Not really the same, atleast not if you know a little bit of history. With AoS and Warhammer you have rosters that are almost completely the same. Chaos, Skaven. Lol, probably Chaos Dwarfs too. There is a bigger change for a TOW DLC/Expansion that focus on the Empire civil War than CA would invest in AoS.

Anyway all guesses, but I don't think they are really interested in AoS.

Edited May 14 by Tonhel

[Ejecutor]

30 minutes ago, PraetorDragoon said:

Did Kragnos even headline the 3e? What did he even do?

Now he is looking for his folks.

[EthanolMuffins]

Dream AOS game would be a stormcast focused roguelike, each of the realms as a different level and with different themed bosses for them

 

Classes could be the different types of stormcast and unlock cosmetics to make them look like leaders/named characters of their type of model

 

AOS has so much potential for games

[Hollow]

Grand Alliance Destruction needs some proper TLC IMO. The entire Grand Alliance feels a bit hap-hazard at the moment. Orruk Warclans has a bit of an identity issue, with the removal of Bonesplitterz and two pretty separate feeling Greenskin concepts in the Ironjaws and Kruelboys. 

Kragnos needed to lead his own fully-fledged destruction faction. He just doesn't fit thematically with the rest of the destruction alliance IMO. 

With the removal of Bonesplitterz Orruks needs to be properly defined with 2 clear factions in the Kruelboyz and Iron Jaws. With a spearhead for each type and continued support across 4th edition.

The Gloomspite need new Spider riders and new Gobbos! 

Ogres need a large range refresh and the Sons would really benefit from having another completely different type of giant kit. 

 

Grand Alliance Destruction is the Alliance in the most need of care and it is a little disappointing that this is the case as we approach the end of the Era of the Beast. 

 

Regarding Spearheads. It might be interesting if GW created a generic mail-order Spearhead box and offered multiple types of Spearhead online with a slight discount on the contents. 

Take Gloomspite for example. It would be cool if there were multiple Spearheads available - Bad Moon, Troggoths, The Spider God's Brood, The Squigs of War, The Spiteful Hordes, Sneaky Spell Flingers. That could be purchased and the Spearhead rules were available as a free downloadable PDF. It means they could package all the different Spearheads in the same box. 

[CommissarRotke]

53 minutes ago, Tonhel said:

Not really the same, atleast not if you know a little bit of history. With AoS and Warhammer you have rosters that are almost completely the same. Chaos, Skaven. Lol, probably Chaos Dwarfs too. There is a bigger change for a TOW DLC/Expansion that focus on the Empire civil War than CA would invest in AoS.

Anyway all guesses, but I don't think they are really interested in AoS.

What does the roster matter if the units all look different? Of course there's going to be name overlap since Chaos is a lynchpin faction in all of their IPs. But I think the AOS factions now look different enough from WHFB that this isn't an issue.

[CommissarRotke]

8 minutes ago, Hollow said:

Regarding Spearheads. It might be interesting if GW created a generic mail-order Spearhead box and offered multiple types of Spearhead online with a slight discount on the contents. 

if the Chaos Marines preorders are something to go by, this might be the idea for both systems. There's 2-3 combat patrol boxes to pick from.

[ZarFranz]

How about a city builder for AOS?

Build your own city in a realm of your choice after your dawnbringer crusades arrival

Establish contact with other factions, ally them or fight them to aid in the development of your city.

Defend against any evils the realms might throw against your peoples new home, be it chaos or order

Face events that will affect the cities development, will Fyreslayers show up demaning Ur-Gold or will a realm gate be uncovered?

Seem quite fun to just speculate but does make me want such a game now.

Edited May 14 by ZarFranz

[Hollow]

I think the idea that CA has been working on a new engine that will support ranged combat in a more robust manner makes a lot of sense. 40k Total War would definitely draw a lot of interest and if the rumours that they are also working on a Total War WW1 game are also true then it would make sense that they want to move into more "modern" warfare that covers 40k. 

[Hollow]

3 minutes ago, ZarFranz said:

Seem quite fun to just speculate but does make me want such a game now.

I think a game based on a Dawnbringer Crusade would be cool. Venture out into a realm to try and establish a settlement. A bit of Frostpunk, RTS, Total War combo. 

[novakai]

Fatshark could do AoS-tide game, it could be based on Cursed city or use a different main enemy beside Skaven. though Fatshark seem to be focus on Darktide at the moment.

there doesn’t seem to be much movement for good AoS video games in the foreseeable future.