Warhammer - The Old World

[Zanzou]

How could a fully revamped, rank-and-file-square-based war game - in an entirely different setting to AoS - possibly be tackled by a small specialist team? And if we are to temper expectations, why a 3-year-early announcement?

[Golgfag]

Thanks for the extra information, I am still expecting it to be a lot more supported then the other various specialist games but we will see. 

The best thing this announcement has done is inspire me to play games in my favourite fantasy setting again using other companies rules until we see what GW brings back.

It is not ranked combat but my group is currently loving Saga Age of Magic which is a brilliant ruleset designed to be used for any fantasy setting. 

I know I could have been doing that the last few years but with GW killing the setting off my groups enthusiasm died off too and we switched to other games, mostly historical based for those years.

Just feels nice that GW has realised what they had in the Old World, plan to explore it again, whatever form it takes and I expect it to be a success, since new GW is not like the old GW management who chose to hamstring certain games in an effort to channel everyone towards purely the biggest seller rather the accepting not everyone wants the same thing. 

[cyrus]

@RuneBrush thank you so much for sharing extra information.

This is roughly what I expect from this project : rank and file , square bases, 28 mm , specialist game but not FW =resin models, narrative campaigns,  legacy armies as Empire,O&G,Dwarfs,Vampire Counts at the very beginning, not in competition with AoS (  no interchangeable models between the two systems)

[RuneBrush]

2 hours ago, Zanzou said:

How could a fully revamped, rank-and-file-square-based war game - in an entirely different setting to AoS - possibly be tackled by a small specialist team? And if we are to temper expectations, why a 3-year-early announcement?

Ultimately time will tell.  Don't take my impression as gospel either, we could find that they decide to allocate a much larger team as time goes on.  I been told in the past that it's not unusual for members of the specialist games studio to have temporary secondment to another project - I know this has happened with Bloodbowl and Lord of the Rings.

One big benefit that the project has is that there's 30 years worth of resource to draw from.  This is pretty unusual and a great resource to kickstart the project - it means that there's always an "expert" to fall back on.

1 hour ago, Golgfag said:

Thanks for the extra information, I am still expecting it to be a lot more supported then the other various specialist games but we will see. 

Agreed.  One of the great things about Specialist Games has been that we've seen that the structure allows them to react a little more quickly to how popular things are, Bloodbowl was so popular it resulted in us getting all of the core teams made in plastic rather than resin - the same applied to Necromunda to, we've not only the base gangs, but also scenery and second sprues for gangs all out in plastic.

Although perhaps not the level of 40k or Necromunda, I would say that if The Old World has as much support as Necromunda or Titanicus, I'd be really happy!  There's enough content to keep the system ticking over and interesting, but not so much that you feel like you're drowning (at least that's how I feel - your own millage will likely vary!)

1 hour ago, Golgfag said:

Just feels nice that GW has realised what they had in the Old World, plan to explore it again, whatever form it takes and I expect it to be a success, since new GW is not like the old GW management who chose to hamstring certain games in an effort to channel everyone towards purely the biggest seller rather the accepting not everyone wants the same thing. 

I actually believe that GW have always wanted a way to keep the old world ticking over, but knew they had to think with their head rather than heart and allow AoS to properly bed in before looking at doing something with it as it would have caused a huge amount of controversy if six-months after AoS launched there was a new (but different) version of Warhammer.  I also think it's allowed a lot of people to properly look at their hobby, in cases people have embraced AoS and others picked up other game systems.  As weird as it sounds I think this has been really healthy and allowed people to look at what they want out of their spare time.

[Golgfag]

11 minutes ago, cyrus said:

@RuneBrush thank you so much for sharing extra information.

This is roughly what I expect from this project : rank and file , square bases, 28 mm , specialist game but not FW =resin models, narrative campaigns,  legacy armies as Empire,O&G,Dwarfs,Vampire Counts at the very beginning, not in competition with AoS (  no interchangeable models between the two systems)

I would be shocked if the two games had no interchangeable models, unless you mean purely because of the base they are on?

As a chunk of AoS armies are still just WFB armies repackaged, I doubt GW would deliberately exclude from the Old World game Lizardmen, various Chaos, Ogres, Wood Elves & Skaven considering they still sell those models. 

Edited January 6, 2020 by Golgfag

[cyrus]

1 hour ago, Golgfag said:

I would be shocked if the two games had no interchangeable models, unless you mean purely because of the base they are on?

As a chunk of AoS armies are still just WFB armies repackaged, I doubt GW would deliberately exclude from the Old World game Lizardmen, various Chaos, Ogres, Wood Elves & Skaven considering they still sell those models. 

I believe all WHFB models were repacked/redesigned to AoS  will not come back to old world 

I expect just few legacy armies at the  very beginning which can not be in "conflict " with AoS range

A studio project really similar to what happened with Blood bowl and Necromunda

Just personal thoughts

 

[Zeblasky]

4 hours ago, RuneBrush said:

As an addition, I was in the Age of Sigmar seminar earlier and Ben Johnson confirmed that there isn't any form of formal discussion between the Specialist Games and AoS studios (I'm meaning interdepartmental discussion here, not that they've fallen out with each other).  This is deliberate and as Ben pointed out makes The Old World really exciting for players such as him that have played classic fantasy battle.  What that means is it's no use pestering him (or other people within the AoS studio) for information - they have exactly the same amount of knowledge that we have!

So no model connections between each other and no rules/subfactions for "New" Fantasy models in AoS? That would be pretty sad.

[Golgfag]

35 minutes ago, cyrus said:

I believe all WHFB models were repacked/redesigned to AoS  will not come back to old world 

I expect just few legacy armies at the  very beginning which can not be in "conflict " with AoS range

A studio project really similar to what happened with Blood bowl and Necromunda

Just personal thoughts

 

The new BB supported all former teams from the start of the re release and still does, as my club was in season five of our league when GW brought it back and the new stuff slotted in nicely rather then replaced anything.

You may be right but considering how much GW loves to sell us models it would be a bit strange to say those many former WFB armies that we still sell for AoS, well we don't want you Old World players buying those thanks.

[hughwyeth]

Thanks for the summary @RuneBrush!

I think, release/development wise, this is copying Sisters release for the same core reason- Sisters and WHFB have a quite vocal, but minority, support on the internet. Judging by the reaction to the announcement, you might think Old World might be as big as 40k, but GW understand than angry nerds on the net produce a lot of noise and there's not a reliable way to tell how much real interest in the game there is. As with sisters, they'll just tease over 2/3 years and guage reaction, adjusting their release as they go to give them the best chance of getting the right level of investment. 

[RuneBrush]

1 hour ago, Zeblasky said:

So no model connections between each other and no rules/subfactions for "New" Fantasy models in AoS? That would be pretty sad.

From AoS to The Old World, I think it very unlikely we're going to see any cross over of new factions - so Stormcast and Kharadron will live firmly within AoS. 

For new models/units that come along within The Old World (for example a Dwarven Banner Bearer or Hearthguard), there is a chance it could happen, but I can't see that happening until the model is physically out in the wild.  This is how it currently works for Heresy models too - some have datasheets created by the 40k studio (if it's appropriate), but rarely before the model has been launched, quite often it'll be a few months and often after lots of the community looking puppy-eyed and and asking "please".

That's of course assuming the scale is compatible between the two game systems.

47 minutes ago, hughwyeth said:

Thanks for the summary @RuneBrush!

I think, release/development wise, this is copying Sisters release for the same core reason- Sisters and WHFB have a quite vocal, but minority, support on the internet. Judging by the reaction to the announcement, you might think Old World might be as big as 40k, but GW understand than angry nerds on the net produce a lot of noise and there's not a reliable way to tell how much real interest in the game there is. As with sisters, they'll just tease over 2/3 years and guage reaction, adjusting their release as they go to give them the best chance of getting the right level of investment. 

One interesting comment made by the Lord of the Ring gents was that one of the things they struggle to know is the number of people playing each of the different game methods (open, narrative and matched) and that they knew that what is online may not be representative of what the reality is - that comment got a lot of nods of agreements from other people responsible for other game systems, so I think you're right when you say that GW does have a grasp on who makes the noise online 😉

[hughwyeth]

19 minutes ago, RuneBrush said:

One interesting comment made by the Lord of the Ring gents was that one of the things they struggle to know is the number of people playing each of the different game methods (open, narrative and matched) and that they knew that what is online may not be representative of what the reality is - that comment got a lot of nods of agreements from other people responsible for other game systems, so I think you're right when you say that GW does have a grasp on who makes the noise online 😉

That's good to know haha.  I know GW is still overwhelmingly Narrative/Open play focused in their general coverage and discussion, yet online is overwhelmingly competitive play. But I always play people who aren't really competitive in the sense that they play semi-decent lists, but are not involved in online conversations around AoS at all, and we play very relaxed matched play games, probably closer to GW's idea of a regular AoS game than TGA's, so I know there are definitely people who don't play pure matched play/competitive driven stuff. 

Just from GW sales, it must be the case that 90% of their players aren't super competitive and are actually in it for model building/painting and casual games.  The competitive community is very small- most tournament players know most other tournament players by name! That's going to be a small proportion of their sales and player base. 

[Frowny]

I kinda thing wfb would actually make sense on smaller bases. Kinda like titanicus or old epic. You could fit bigger ranks of troups on a table, and still keep the ranked fighting feel. I always thought the coolest part was maneuvering the blocks of Infantry, not all the fiddly points for various items on heroes 

[gjnoronh]

58 minutes ago, Frowny said:

I kinda thing wfb would actually make sense on smaller bases. Kinda like titanicus or old epic. You could fit bigger ranks of troups on a table, and still keep the ranked fighting feel. I always thought the coolest part was maneuvering the blocks of Infantry, not all the fiddly points for various items on heroes 

There are guys in New York city I know who have moved to playing 'microhammer' Warhammer 8th or 9th Age using 15mm Warmaster style armies.   I've never done it personally but I think it makes a ton of sense in that environment where space is at a premium.  can lay out a game on a coffee table and carry it all including terrain in a back pack.

 

 

[cyrus]

4 hours ago, Golgfag said:

The new BB supported all former teams from the start of the re release and still does, as my club was in season five of our league when GW brought it back and the new stuff slotted in nicely rather then replaced anything.

You may be right but considering how much GW loves to sell us models it would be a bit strange to say those many former WFB armies that we still sell for AoS, well we don't want you Old World players buying those thanks.

I can't really see WFB coming back 

More some very lore focused game with legacy characters such as Karl Franz ,Grimgor,Vlad,Thorek , placed in the heart of old world such as empire,badlands,sylvania and dwarven strongholds. At least at very beginning. 

We 'll see !

 

[RuneBrush]

3 hours ago, hughwyeth said:

But I always play people who aren't really competitive in the sense that they play semi-decent lists, but are not involved in online conversations around AoS at all, and we play very relaxed matched play games, probably closer to GW's idea of a regular AoS game than TGA's, so I know there are definitely people who don't play pure matched play/competitive driven stuff. 

100% know what you mean.  I tend to think about competitive play as a specific sub-set of matched play if that makes sense.  There's also instances where you can actually play using matched play rules, with a narrative theme, but with open play additions 😂 but now I'm starting to get off topic!

[RexHavoc]

 

hours ago, RuneBrush said:

I didn't get the impression we were looking at Warmaster scale (6mm if memory serves) for the game,

10mm for warmaster. I'd have killed for 6mm warmaster back in the day. I loved Epic and never understood why they didn't bring out a small scale WFB. Then warmaster came out at 10mm scale and I was like this is great, its just a tad too big. It's a shame warmaster never really took off as it would have been a perfect way of keeping WFB around even now. Big massed battles are amazing at small scale and its so much cheaper to collect (until you get hooked at least!) I'm far too heavily invested in 6mm fantasy now to ever go back so in a way I hope it isn't going to be a warmaster return (even if I do secretly want it to be!) I dont think they;d do that though, too many larger scale fans would be furious.

hours ago, RuneBrush said:

or alternatively we could see something like 15mm or 10mm (which is what AT is).

No, AT is quarter 40k scale, which put its in a weird place. Its kind of 7mm scale and also what is know in the Epic community as 6mm truescale. At least you didn't say it was 8mm, that is a whole can of worms! lol

hours ago, RuneBrush said:

Annoyingly I should have asked the question on scale (I'm blaming a 4.30am start for my brain not firing on all cylinders).

Not good enough, You need to go back in time and ask this. If you refuse, then you will be required to attend every other open day you want to go to and bring us more info!

Thanks for the intel though.

I'm really hoping it is a HH style campaign book set. There are too many other good options for me to to switch out from them back to pure WFB models and rules now. Best thing GW can do is offer the things that you can't get else where- gorgeous campaign books and maps of the old world and a handful of really nice models for each race. I'd say a duel set of infantry, one duel set hero, one mounted set, one cannnon or troll sized monster and one duel build big kit.

I still think it was a bad idea announcing it so early with nothing to show. It was clear they just want people ot not be spending so much on other ranges which are growing in popularity and probably hope those holding out for WFB will spend on AoS in the meantime. But I can see people being massively annoyed by the time we finally get some real idea of what is coming.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[amysrevenge]

1 hour ago, RexHavoc said:

I still think it was a bad idea announcing it so early with nothing to show. It was clear they just want people ot not be spending so much on other ranges which are growing in popularity and probably hope those holding out for WFB will spend on AoS in the meantime. But I can see people being massively annoyed by the time we finally get some real idea of what is coming.

This is basically where my chips have landed also.  Too soon for too little.  Save the announcement for 2021 (or even later haha).

[RuneBrush]

12 hours ago, RexHavoc said:

I'm really hoping it is a HH style campaign book set. There are too many other good options for me to to switch out from them back to pure WFB models and rules now. Best thing GW can do is offer the things that you can't get else where- gorgeous campaign books and maps of the old world and a handful of really nice models for each race. I'd say a duel set of infantry, one duel set hero, one mounted set, one cannnon or troll sized monster and one duel build big kit.

My own hope is that it'll be something like the HH black books too.  Although I might not ever get into the game, I would be sorely tempted to pick up the books that go with it

12 hours ago, RexHavoc said:

I still think it was a bad idea announcing it so early with nothing to show. It was clear they just want people ot not be spending so much on other ranges which are growing in popularity and probably hope those holding out for WFB will spend on AoS in the meantime. But I can see people being massively annoyed by the time we finally get some real idea of what is coming.

I do think the timing is curious as it's earlier than anything I can recall.  One thought I did have is that it's plausible that somebody had started rumouring, so they wanted to get in first if that makes sense.  I'm not sure that this announcement will have massively changed people's buying habits.  Most people who were on the fence about AoS have either gone to a different system or taken the plunge into AoS.

[hughwyeth]

1 hour ago, RuneBrush said:

My own hope is that it'll be something like the HH black books too.  Although I might not ever get into the game, I would be sorely tempted to pick up the books that go with it

Those hard back sleeved End Times books were lovely and had great narrative and interesting rules- something like that would be great.

I imagine they will be 28mm as then people can use them in AoS- though I suppose they'll mostly be limited to Cities of Sigmar/Death armies.

[Whitefang]

I doubt they will waste those new sculpts of Chaos (herdstone, chaos warriors) when they released the old world.

 

[Gorks Pokin' Finger]

No matter the scale and design, I expect they will make the rules similar to 40k Armageddon with the focus being on the units. Depending on scale, you won't need as many models, even for hordes like Orcs & Goblins and Skaven  (hopefully). In terms of crossover, I could understand if GW goes to a smaller scale just so players aren't mixing units for both. That cuts into sales if you have players reusing the same models for both systems

 

[Beastmaster]

Couldn’t it also mean more sales if pure AoS players are enticed to buy Wfb models for their armies and vice versa? 
Same as BB or Underworlds models that are often bought to use them for AoS conversions.

[michu]

If it's 28 mm I already have an idea for WFB Warden King conversion using Fyreslayers bits.

[Golgfag]

2 hours ago, Whitefang said:

I doubt they will waste those new sculpts of Chaos (herdstone, chaos warriors) when they released the old world.

 

Exactly, why would GW deliberately deny themselves sales.

Same with a lot of the Gloomspite models, are they really going to tell Old World players they don't want us buying a more developed Night Goblin army from them, I am doubtful considering GW exist to sell us as many models as possible.

[VBS]

Thank for the extra unofficial infos @RuneBrush. Im eager for more news, hopefully adepticon will show they already have some meat on the project.

As for the scale or type of models, one can only guess the consequences. Its impossible to control what everyone wants and how they enjoy their toys. So a compatibility between TOW and AOS models can very well mean a cut on sales if someone decides to drop one in favour of the other. Similarly, it could also increase sales if that person sees value in using models accross multiple systems (it is my case ) and buys even more (ex: instead of just having 1 army for each separately, I might directly buy 3 armies knowing that I can use them regardless and have more value in variety and compatibility). 

So you never know! Plus, I suspect GW is just happy if you throw them your money, regardless of the game you play. I dont see them complaining about the huge amount of KoW or T9A players that use AoS/WHFB models, so this should be no different IF it is actually the same scale. Moreso, it might suck out players from those systems back into the GW-R&F world instead of looking at other companies.

I'd be fine too if they went 6-10-15mm anyway, I might simply buy less stuff if it were the case.