Warhammer - The Old World

[Neverchosen]

1 hour ago, Whitefang said:

The overall art design of Cathay and Kislev are all done and good enough to make a video game though. 
It’s just the production process taking time 

Interestingly the same could be argued in favour of High Elves, Wood Elves, Brettonnians and Tomb Kings. 🤩

Not asking you to play your hand but as a fellow poster interested in the Old World, do you have a preference between the two kingdoms. More broadly speaking any army or faction you are excited to see again in the old world setting?

Edited July 23, 2021 by Neverchosen

[Public Universal Duardin]

On 7/22/2021 at 2:18 PM, Beliman said:

That's exactly what I wanted for AoS. 1 trait and 1 to 3 artefacts, Imo, it's not enough to build my own Hero. When I remember the Runic-system... I mean... THE RUNIC-SYSTEM!!!!

You woke up something from the recesses of my mind...wasn't it that you could customise dwarf weapons? 3 runes per weapon, you couldn't have more than one of the same rune? Something like that? It's been so long...but I remember how FUN it was!

[Mandzak-Miniatures]

Hype for new empire knights/ regular knights on horses lol

[RuneBrush]

11 minutes ago, Public Universal Duardin said:

You woke up something from the recesses of my mind...wasn't it that you could customise dwarf weapons? 3 runes per weapon, you couldn't have more than one of the same rune? Something like that? It's been so long...but I remember how FUN it was!

And you couldn't replicate the same rune combinations on different weapons (jealous runes or something like that I believe)

[Beliman]

5 minutes ago, Public Universal Duardin said:

You woke up something from the recesses of my mind...wasn't it that you could customise dwarf weapons? 3 runes per weapon, you couldn't have more than one of the same rune? Something like that? It's been so long...but I remember how FUN it was!

Exactly that. But not just for weapons, you could have warmachines with artillery runes, banners, armor, etc.. we had even "laws" to use and combine them.

I still have hope to see that in AoS. Maybe in that "duardin warclans" book...

[Greybeard86]

It looks like GW is getting this right.

I think some people are so used to some of the more consumer "unfriendly" practices to the extent that they seemed to wanted lack of oldhammer compatibility (they have to sell minis, it is a business, it wouldn't be viable, etc.).

I am glad they are accepting that some people will want to re-use minis, and then just adding re-sculpts and new models on top.

So: 👌👍👍👍👍👍

[Whitefang]

37 minutes ago, Neverchosen said:

Interestingly the same could be argued in favour of High Elves, Wood Elves, Brettonnians and Tomb Kings. 🤩

Not asking you to play your hand but as a fellow poster interested in the Old World, do you have a preference between the two kingdoms. More broadly speaking any army or faction you are excited to see again in the old world setting?

Yeah, though I think the redesign and resculpting in modern vibes may take a bit longer, I bet even by now they have already put some efforts into reintroducing “classic” factions

If choose only between the two new ones, I think atm Kislev is a miss for me. I personally think the design vibe is too realistic, lacking that intriguing combination of mythical and realistic elements in the broader scenes of WFB. The focus on bear is fine, but the way how they resolve it lacks of creativity, they can do something more like the elemental bear, snow leopard or streltsy (which is my favorite), or even dive into the Eastern European folklore and deconstruct it.

Cathay is the one yet to be seen, and I am interested to see the warhammer take of Far East cultures. Giant flying snakes and terracota army would be fine, but if it’s just that copy paste over a thousand of times, it’s gonna be too mythical and lame, on the other hand, limited on monks and kungfu fighters are also boring to me. Something akin to Sekiro* would be my taste. 

Broadly speaking? It’s time for the first priest king and lord of Khemri to show people what imperishable means once again and I am ready to put Nagash‘s skull under the wheel of his chariot😜

[Jator]

Quote

Both! We’ve played every single edition of Warhammer Fantasy Battles over the years and like every player, we have our favourite bits from each. Warhammer: The Old World will gather up all our favourite mechanics from the 3rd edition to the 8th edition** and add new elements where needed to create something deeply familiar yet fresh and new.

 So which mechanics does people think will make a comeback and which ones will be forgotten?

I'm pretty sure we'll have random charges because no way we get back to "no premeasuring". Yes, KoW has showed that you can have premeasures and fixed charge values, but that's not GW's style.

I hope we lose the incentives to really big hordes, let's keep a reasonable entry cost.

I also think "square bases" doesn't necessarily mean they keep the same base sizes. Potentially annoying, but also better if you want cross-compatibility with AoS.

I found intriguing they reference hobgoblins twice in the article. They seemed kind of forgotten and now they're receiving love in two game systems? Not that I would complain.

 

Edited July 23, 2021 by Jator

[Kaleb Daark]

33 minutes ago, Jator said:

 So which mechanics does people think will make a comeback and which ones will be forgotten?

I'm pretty sure we'll have random charges because no way we get back to "no premeasuring". Yes, KoW has showed that you can have premeasures and fixed charge values, but that's not GW's style.

I hope we lose the incentives to really big hordes, let's keep a reasonable entry cost.

I also think "square bases" doesn't necessarily mean they keep the same base sizes. Potentially annoying, but also better if you want cross-compatibility with AoS.

I found intriguing they reference hobgoblins twice in the article. They seemed kind of forgotten and now they're receiving love in two game systems? Not that I would complain.

 

I think this was one of the biggest kneecaps to new players of old fantasy, and a great turnoff.

The way the army was structured was a throwback to the 2nd and 3rd edition army books.

So lets take 25% minimum core tax.

A warriors of chaos army was laughing.  One unit of 25 and you were done.

That was two boxes of warriors with extra to make a bsb and a champion, so dropping what 30 pounds?

However if you were a greenskin or skaven player, you were practically buying ten boxes at 15 quid each just to give your army minimum legality.

They should have just followed 40k lead, which is what AoS has learnt about army composition, where the unit size was dictated by the number of models in the box, and you had to have say minimum of two or three units - so that just made everything cleaner and easier to stomach.

I mean what, when island of blood came out it was literally a rite for skaven players to buy three or four boxes just to make up their minimum skaven slaves allocation cost effectively.

I also feel a combined stat mechanic would be better for mounted stuff unless you can say, well on a three wound knight, first two wounds knock out the mount and then he fights on foot for the last wound.  Or alternatively just remove that bs rule about being able to target a just the character on a ridden monster, after all, if you had your lord on dragon get near a building, he was allowed to dismount to go into the building on foot.

I agree with you about square bases, no sizes have been given and I'm wondering if that will be standardised to a degree, after all, remember in end times the blight kings and khorne farmers in iron dungarees all got the ogre sized 40mm bases, which in effect are the linear outline size of a 32mm round (ish), who knows, perhaps everything will go up a size so as to be able to use either square, or equivalent AoS rounds in a movement tray?

Hobgoblins were around back in 3rd and you could take them as mercenaries.

Does anyone remember the baggage train?

[Warboss Gorbolg]

WHFB was replaced in part because it became a highly complex game with a huge buy-in (both time and money). These were at least some of the contributors that led to the game's declining popularity and sales. Will be interesting to see how FW tries to address this while keeping it similar enough to not alienate the former player base. TOW seems tricky to execute from my perspective. 

I still hope for an updated Mordheim frequently. I will not be playing TOW but maybe Mordheim will make a return at some point as an offshoot of TOW.

[Neverchosen]

3 hours ago, Whitefang said:

Yeah, though I think the redesign and resculpting in modern vibes may take a bit longer, I bet even by now they have already put some efforts into reintroducing “classic” factions

If choose only between the two new ones, I think atm Kislev is a miss for me. I personally think the design vibe is too realistic, lacking that intriguing combination of mythical and realistic elements in the broader scenes of WFB. The focus on bear is fine, but the way how they resolve it lacks of creativity, they can do something more like the elemental bear, snow leopard or streltsy (which is my favorite), or even dive into the Eastern European folklore and deconstruct it.

Cathay is the one yet to be seen, and I am interested to see the warhammer take of Far East cultures. Giant flying snakes and terracota army would be fine, but if it’s just that copy paste over a thousand of times, it’s gonna be too mythical and lame, on the other hand, limited on monks and kungfu fighters are also boring to me. Something akin to Sekiro* would be my taste. 

Broadly speaking? It’s time for the first priest king and lord of Khemri to show people what imperishable means once again and I am ready to put Nagash‘s skull under the wheel of his chariot😜

Interesting insights as always, I feel like there is a mixture of models that GW can easily revive like the Dwarf Warriors and then others that need to be more or less started again from scratch such as many of the ones in the factions that I listed above.

I think Kislev is almost there for me aesthetically... I think that there is a lot of mixture between fabric and armour allowing for some really fun painting opportunities. I am doing snowy bases and a wintery theme for my current armies and so Kislev fit the aesthetic nicely, especially if I were to ever proxy them as Cities models. But there is not really a wow factor and it is simply replacing the Italian/German renaissance vibe with their Russian equivalent. I wish the leaned more into the cryomancey stuff as it is the coolest part of the army so far. Full on ice armour and weapons would be my preferred option... 🤔

I think that your Cathay example is really interesting and they have an amazing chance for providing some fantastic models and paint schemes. I think alongside Araby it is the faction I am most excited and most nervous about seeing translated on the tabletop as they both could slide into problematic representation very easily. I like the idea of drawing on FromSoftware's aesthetics as they have really found a way of balancing dark aesthetics with stunning design work. 

A return of Tomb Kings with modern sculpts would be fantastic. With my interest in both Araby and Tomb Kings, I am starting to think that maybe I should leave the snowy tundra to the Mortal Realms and take a desert themed approach to my square bases... although I doubt I could afford or store that many minis 😅

Edited July 23, 2021 by Neverchosen

[Twisted Firaun]

4 hours ago, Whitefang said:

Yeah, though I think the redesign and resculpting in modern vibes may take a bit longer, I bet even by now they have already put some efforts into reintroducing “classic” factions

If choose only between the two new ones, I think atm Kislev is a miss for me. I personally think the design vibe is too realistic, lacking that intriguing combination of mythical and realistic elements in the broader scenes of WFB. The focus on bear is fine, but the way how they resolve it lacks of creativity, they can do something more like the elemental bear, snow leopard or streltsy (which is my favorite), or even dive into the Eastern European folklore and deconstruct it.

Cathay is the one yet to be seen, and I am interested to see the warhammer take of Far East cultures. Giant flying snakes and terracota army would be fine, but if it’s just that copy paste over a thousand of times, it’s gonna be too mythical and lame, on the other hand, limited on monks and kungfu fighters are also boring to me. Something akin to Sekiro* would be my taste. 

Broadly speaking? It’s time for the first priest king and lord of Khemri to show people what imperishable means once again and I am ready to put Nagash‘s skull under the wheel of his chariot😜

 

45 minutes ago, Neverchosen said:

A return of Tomb Kings with modern sculpts would be fantastic. With my interest in both Araby and Tomb Kings, I am starting to think that maybe I should leave the snowy tundra to the Mortal Realms and take a desert themed approach to my square bases... although I doubt I could afford or store that many minis 😅

 

45 minutes ago, Neverchosen said:

I think Kislev is almost there for me aesthetically... I think that there is a lot of mixture between fabric and armour allowing for some really fun painting opportunities. I am doing snowy bases and a wintery theme for my current armies and so Kislev fit the aesthetic nicely, especially if I were to ever proxy them as Cities models. But there is not really a wow factor and it is simply replacing the Italian/German renaissance vibe with their Russian equivalent. I wish the leaned more into the cryomancey stuff as it is the coolest part of the army so far. Full on ice armour and weapons would be my preferred option... 🤔

I agree with both @Whitefangand @Neverchosen on some of their views, and I would like to explain my reasoning. 

My love for Tomb Kings shouldn't really need an explanation given my profile name and pic, but the gist of it is that I am an Egyptian-American who really loved The Mummy franchise with Brendan Fraser(the Tom Cruise movie DID NOT HAPPEN), so of course I'm going to get hooked on a faction of mummies and stone monsters. The lore was just a bonus.

My love for Kislev is admittedly just for the bear mounts, I was born in Iowa City but my father and his family have deep ties to Chicago(and I have lived in that city and it's suburbs for more than half my life at this point in time), and I want to paint an army  in Bears colors. The fact that they(GW and CA) have seemingly gone and created a brand spanking new army with great models is just a bonus.

The armies I really want to see though, are Araby, Chaos Dwarfs, and Vampire Coast. I think the last two speak for themselves, so I'm just going to focus on Araby. As I have stated earlier I am an Egyptian-American, and I am also a Muslim, so I really want to see how GW handles this faction. I know that in the past they kept the Araby lore intentionally vague(and slightly racist), but I really want them to go all out with an Arabian Nights/Ottoman Empire look. Janisary riflemen, learned magi summoning various djinn to fight alongside them, and Mamluks rocking all sorts of enchanted gear. 

[Neverchosen]

@Loyal Son of Khemri you do not need to defend your love of bears!

I think that we have a lot of shared aesthetic inclinations and I think that Kislev are really aesthetically pleasing but as a general rule I am rarely drawn to primarily human factions in fantasy. But the idea of armies that feature humans working alongside supernatural and fantastical beings and creatures interests me greatly, hence my interest in the frost weapons. I also think this is why I am drawn to most Chaos factions as they pose an existential question about faith as the evidence they have for Gods comes purely from interactions with Demons. The fear and terror of knowing that an experience with the divine can drive someone's faith but what occurs when instead of facing a benevolent loving god it is a terrifying set of malevolent extradimensional terrors?  

I really hope that we have build options for frost weapons and regular steel weapons so that those of us who are using them for AOS can play with the more magical side of the army. For example the amazing three pronged spear in the following image:




As for Araby, I am really fascinated by the Islamic Golden Age but it is also something that is often overlooked or ignored in most fantasy literature and games. The idea of playing an army that is adept in science, medicine and art with unique cultures and ideologies and varied troop types and tactics makes me really interested in picking up the army purely for the human side of the army. However, as you point out the portrayal of Araby is often more problematic and it is likely that they will not be represented in the best light especially regarding cultural stereotypes. Also, despite loving the human side of the army I can hardly think of a cooler centre piece than a mighty Djinn.

Also I selfishly hope that Chaos Dwarves are in AOS and tied to Slaves to Darkness. It will give me access to one of my favourite armies and also keep them around for the foreseeable future as a subfaction of one of Warhammer's most iconic factions. Although I will be happy no matter what if they show up, even if I was somehow unable to use them allies. Also, I have something of a diverse cultural background and some parts of my background are over represented in these types of stories... and other parts are typically entirely absent.

Edited July 23, 2021 by Neverchosen

[baiardo]

I would like to know if it will be possible to play some aos models like vampire lord or some chaos or zombie units or this is already excluded?

Edited July 23, 2021 by baiardo

[Jefferson Skarsnik]

All they have really said is "we want you to be able to play with your old models", but it would be odd by that logic to somehow exclude from proxying in newer AOS sculpts that have obvious direct equivalents in warhammer  fantasy so it's probably fine. Which non-empire and empire-adjacent factions get any kind of updated rules and when is less clear though

I also think the old models statement makes changing the base sizes unlikely as following that up with "but you will need to rebase all of those old models on to a slightly differently sized square bases" would be fairly sociopathic of GW, but we all saw the Radukar's court pricing so who knows lol

Edited July 23, 2021 by Jefferson Skarsnik

[Twisted Firaun]

1 hour ago, Neverchosen said:

@Loyal Son of Khemri you do not need to defend your love of bears!

I think that we have a lot of shared aesthetic inclinations and I think that Kislev are really aesthetically pleasing but as a general rule I am rarely drawn to primarily human factions in fantasy. But the idea of armies that feature humans working alongside supernatural and fantastical beings and creatures interests me greatly, hence my interest in the frost weapons. I also think this is why I am drawn to most Chaos factions as they pose an existential question about faith as the evidence they have for Gods comes purely from interactions with Demons. The fear and terror of knowing that an experience with the divine can drive someone's faith but what occurs when instead of facing a benevolent loving god it is a terrifying set of malevolent extradimensional terrors?  

I really hope that we have build options for frost weapons and regular steel weapons so that those of us who are using them for AOS can play with the more magical side of the army. For example the amazing three pronged spear in the following image:




As for Araby, I am really fascinated by the Islamic Golden Age but it is also something that is often overlooked or ignored in most fantasy literature and games. The idea of playing an army that is adept in science, medicine and art with unique cultures and ideologies and varied troop types and tactics makes me really interested in picking up the army purely for the human side of the army. However, as you point out the portrayal of Araby is often more problematic and it is likely that they will not be represented in the best light especially regarding cultural stereotypes. Also, despite loving the human side of the army I can hardly think of a cooler centre piece than a mighty Djinn.

Also I selfishly hope that Chaos Dwarves are in AOS and tied to Slaves to Darkness. It will give me access to one of my favourite armies and also keep them around for the foreseeable future as a subfaction of one of Warhammer's most iconic factions. Although I will be happy no matter what if they show up, even if I was somehow unable to use them allies. Also, I have something of a diverse cultural background and some parts of my background are over represented in these types of stories... and other parts are typically entirely absent.

@Neverchosen, I admittedly haven’t done as much reading as I should have on the Islamic Golden Age, but from what I do know it is a fascinating time period. The main problem I see is the religious aspect, do GW make Araby worship the old nehekharan pantheon, or stick with Djinn worship like they did in later editions? Cause I’m fairly certain if they try to use Islam as a base for a fantasy faction, someone is gonna do something stupid. 
 

Bear wise I’m planning on basing my Kislev army(when it comes out) on the Ainu culture. I learned about the Ainu from Golden Kamuy(weeb that I am) and find them fascinating. Plus it’s okay lore wise cause the Ainu worship bears as a god(though they also tended to sacrifice them…. I’ll work on it). The fact that they’re also Mongolian/polish  as well as Tsar Russian is just icing on the cake.

I also play Chaos for the same reason as you. My favorite Black Library stories are ones that involve faith and no one quite expresses its complexities like the Chaos factions. The fact that viewing their “God” often breaks the worshipper’s sanity makes a twisted kind of sense if you have a cursory knowledge of most faith’s views on the gods, who often took on different guises to avoid outright killing their worshippers(heck in the Quran, Allah disintegrated a mountain just by showing his face), and angels were typically just as horrifying as demons. 
as for Chaos dwarfs, whether they are a full faction or a sub group of Slaves to Darkness makes no difference to me. So long as they have good rules, models, and still worship Hashut I’m all for them.

[Neverchosen]

16 hours ago, Loyal Son of Khemri said:

@Neverchosen, I admittedly haven’t done as much reading as I should have on the Islamic Golden Age, but from what I do know it is a fascinating time period. The main problem I see is the religious aspect, do GW make Araby worship the old nehekharan pantheon, or stick with Djinn worship like they did in later editions? Cause I’m fairly certain if they try to use Islam as a base for a fantasy faction, someone is gonna do something stupid. 
 

Bear wise I’m planning on basing my Kislev army(when it comes out) on the Ainu culture. I learned about the Ainu from Golden Kamuy(weeb that I am) and find them fascinating. Plus it’s okay lore wise cause the Ainu worship bears as a god(though they also tended to sacrifice them…. I’ll work on it). The fact that they’re also Mongolian/polish  as well as Tsar Russian is just icing on the cake.

I also play Chaos for the same reason as you. My favorite Black Library stories are ones that involve faith and no one quite expresses its complexities like the Chaos factions. The fact that viewing their “God” often breaks the worshipper’s sanity makes a twisted kind of sense if you have a cursory knowledge of most faith’s views on the gods, who often took on different guises to avoid outright killing their worshippers(heck in the Quran, Allah disintegrated a mountain just by showing his face), and angels were typically just as horrifying as demons. 
as for Chaos dwarfs, whether they are a full faction or a sub group of Slaves to Darkness makes no difference to me. So long as they have good rules, models, and still worship Hashut I’m all for them.

I am from Canada so the Islamic Golden Age is something that I learned about mostly through University and even then in a limited fashion. But it is something that piqued my interest but I mostly know it through art and culture and less in terms of direct historical sources. I assume that in general GW might shy away from Araby in general for the reasons you listed. But it would be a real shame as I think it could be one of the most complex and varied armies in the old world. Thankfully Games Workshop tends to avoid making the faiths in their games direct adaptations of real world religions. 

I know very little about Ainu cultural tradition or history but what little I have read about them is fascinating and their traditional attire is a painters dream, but well beyond my skills. For my own purposes I would want them to borrow elements from both my Chaos and Stormcast armies and present them as the culture that both armies derive from as in my mind they were once one army that took opposite paths. 

I will confess I do not read enough Black Library fiction having only flipped through a few Gotrek and Felix novels and one Mallus Darkblade story. I primarily get most of my lore from Battle Tomes and Rules books but Broken Realms has gotten me more interested in checking some more stories out as I loved the lore in those books. Although in response to the recent IP debates maybe I will finally get around to reading some Michael Moorcock instead.

Edited July 24, 2021 by Neverchosen

[Greybeard86]

16 hours ago, Warboss Gorbolg said:

WHFB was replaced in part because it became a highly complex game with a huge buy-in (both time and money). These were at least some of the contributors that led to the game's declining popularity and sales. Will be interesting to see how FW tries to address this while keeping it similar enough to not alienate the former player base. TOW seems tricky to execute from my perspective. 

I still hope for an updated Mordheim frequently. I will not be playing TOW but maybe Mordheim will make a return at some point as an offshoot of TOW.

Well, the horde VS elite issue is also nasty in 40k.

A first solution would be to limit the size of units. Do we really need 60 models of the same? Wouldn t sizes like 12/6/3 represent well the regiments? I mean, first thing we need to abandon is the 1 to 1 scale. A model should not be a trooper, they need to abstract from this.

Smaller units are also more maneuverable, allow for more unit diversity, and look more fun on the table.

Frankly, huge regiments in model count look more like a way to sell more kits than anything. Except that in the end it was just too much for anyone sensible to get into (so no need blood).

[Zeblasky]

18 hours ago, KriticalKhan said:

Not really. It takes about three years to design and release a single army, and they're making an entire game system that was likely delayed due to Covid. They announced it really, really early and even admitted that we'd be looking at a 3+ (probably around 5, honestly) year wait time. You can debate whether or not it was worth revealing they were working on it so soon, but the fact is that they probably DON'T have a lot to show, and that's nothing to be worried about, or if they do, they don't want to start heavily marketing something that won't be out for several more years.

Their strategy right now of the occasional update to let people know the game still exists and is being worked on is probably the best way of handling things. Otherwise people would start doomposting if they said nothing and get pissy over how long things are taken if they show too much.

And this isn't related to what you said at all, but it's pretty funny (and a little annoying) about how dismissive of the game a lot of people are here. Most AoS players spent 5 years getting shat on for liking something, and now the moment things turn around, they go and do the same thing. I don't know if people are actually scared TOW could kill AoS or if they're just bitter the "dead grog game" came back, but I'm getting a little sick of seeing it.

Sure, it takes a long time to create a new whole game. Probably less when you're talking about reviving existing one, but still. But when after more than a year and a half the only thing shown is a map, I feel that Old World future is bleak. Add to that the initial rumours that starting Old World team was small, and it paints a picture of a team simply not suited to the huge task set before them just trying to keep the hype alive.

 

Add to that the fact that if AoS and Old World still existed shoulder to shoulder while being on a different bases, I would have probably never gotten into AoS Cities of Sigmar and would not have spent so much on an army I will probably have eventually to abandon in the future. At least I can still rebase some trees and cavalry stuff for my Wood Elves.

 

23 hours ago, Whitefang said:

The overall art design of Cathay and Kislev are all done and good enough to make a video game though. 
It’s just the production process taking time 

That's the thing though, those are Creative Assembly (the company behind TW:W) concepts, not GW ones. The only thing from GW production we have right now is a map.

[Clan's Cynic]

39 minutes ago, Zeblasky said:

Sure, it takes a long time to create a new whole game. Probably less when you're talking about reviving existing one, but still. But when after more than a year and a half the only thing shown is a map, I feel that Old World future is bleak. Add to that the initial rumours that starting Old World team was small, and it paints a picture of a team simply not suited to the huge task set before them just trying to keep the hype alive.

Add to that the fact that if AoS and Old World still existed shoulder to shoulder while being on a different bases, I would have probably never gotten into AoS Cities of Sigmar and would not have spent so much on an army I will probably have eventually to abandon in the future. At least I can still rebase some trees and cavalry stuff for my Wood Elves.

That's the thing though, those are Creative Assembly (the company behind TW:W) concepts, not GW ones. The only thing from GW production we have right now is a map.

Games Workshop are usually very hush-hush about development, to the point that even the minimal information we have on TOW is a huge amount compared to the norm. The closest we had was the Sister Bulletin and that was closer to an extended model preview than really a 'development diary' of any sort. To say that GW pretty much never announce projects which aren't extremely close to a retail release, TOW is an unusual case and it was probably done in response to Kings of War 3.0 being announced. Also they said themselves it was still years away - we're still looking at least 2-3 and, as said, these few scraps we're being thrown are more than most everything else gets.

39 minutes ago, Zeblasky said:

That's the thing though, those are Creative Assembly (the company behind TW:W) concepts, not GW ones. The only thing from GW production we have right now is a map.

Games Workshop very rarely show off their internal designs and we know they are incredibly strict about third-parties handling their IP. GW will absolutely have their own concept art of the Kislev/Cathay stuff - Ice Guard and BearCav for example we've already seen from their end.

Edited July 24, 2021 by Clan's Cynic

[Public Universal Duardin]

On 7/23/2021 at 5:06 PM, RuneBrush said:

And you couldn't replicate the same rune combinations on different weapons (jealous runes or something like that I believe)

You're right! I should try and find that old army book next time I visit my family home to walk down on memory lane.

On 7/23/2021 at 5:07 PM, Beliman said:

Exactly that. But not just for weapons, you could have warmachines with artillery runes, banners, armor, etc.. we had even "laws" to use and combine them.

I still have hope to see that in AoS. Maybe in that "duardin warclans" book...

I honestly believe TOW has greater chance for it's glorious return, but I would not lose hope over seeing it (albeit probably in a more gimpe...I mean, streamlined form) in AoS in some form. I'm ofc just wishlisting here, but seems GW really leans in on the nostalgia factor and the rune system is iconic.

[Whitefang]

7 hours ago, Zeblasky said:

That's the thing though, those are Creative Assembly (the company behind TW:W) concepts, not GW ones. The only thing from GW production we have right now is a map.

Wrong

CA’s design is based on the material provided by GW

And considering the production process

if TOW is gonna be released in 2022 or 2023

The mold of miniatures should have been completed at the moment and even some experimenting models have already been produced 

[KriticalKhan]

7 hours ago, Zeblasky said:

But when after more than a year and a half the only thing shown is a map, I feel that Old World future is bleak. Add to that the initial rumours that starting Old World team was small, and it paints a picture of a team simply not suited to the huge task set before them just trying to keep the hype alive.

 

The only thing they've CHOSEN to show is a map. As others says, that's far, far more than anything else that GW has done.

"Initial rumors" also said that it would be a total reboot, you wouldn't be able to use your old armies, it would be circle bases and also a Warmaster redo at the same time, and guess how many of those turned out to be true?

I don't know how many times I'll have to repeat this, but this is going to take a long time. They announced it early. That's all that's going on. Your feeling is based on hearsay, lies, and a misunderstanding of how long GW's production time is.

[Noserenda]

Hmmm im not sure i really like the idea of AoS revamps being subverted to rank on smaller square bases and im pretty certain they havent done that with gravelords for example. It could work, a unit of dwarf infantry modelled in tight formation could be awesome but a lot of factions have really benefited  in the switch to looser formations.

Huge units similarly worked for some factions, one of my regular opponents at the time fielded 100 clanrats round a screaming bell and it always looked great but i 100 near identical savage orcs looked weird. 

Their current philosophy in the main AoS team is definitely leaning towards small units though, so i suspect we will see something along those lines.

[RuneBrush]

On 7/24/2021 at 8:31 PM, Whitefang said:

Wrong

CA’s design is based on the material provided by GW

And considering the production process

if TOW is gonna be released in 2022 or 2023

The mold of miniatures should have been completed at the moment and even some experimenting models have already been produced 

100% this.  Quite a bit (if not all) of the concept art used by CA was created by Mark Bedford.  I'm not 100% sure of his official job title currently but he's is effectually the head of design/concept for Specialist Games