Hollow
-
Posts
522 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Gallery
Store
Downloads
Blogs
Events
Posts posted by Hollow
-
-
54 minutes ago, Sception said:
A word on the epubs, for anyone else who got those. GW uses some pretty wonky formatting on the already wonky epub3 file type and a lot of readers don't handle it well.
Apple users shouldn't have any issues, as the default books app works fine.
On windows PC, GW recommends Azardi, and that's the only reader that's been able to work for GW epubs for me on windows since the old redium extension for chrome went chrome-os exclusive. Azardi itself is a bit of a pain to find these days as most of the default distributions for it seem to be defunct. I was able to get it here: https://www.softpedia.com/get/Others/E-Book/Azardi-eReader.shtml
For Android Users, Google Play Books works, except it has a file size maximum of 100mb, which isn't enough for the big rulebook, and most other android ereaders can't handle GW's epubs at all. The one I know that does work is Colibrio Reader, so use that.
I'd recommend converting the epub files into PDFs. So much easier.
-
3 minutes ago, Bosskelot said:
It's often not about nostalgia at all, but just simply; they're far more simple to build, and far easier to paint down to less details and more static poses leading to less of the model being "exposed" to a persons vision
I remember when I returned to purchasing 40k after several years and bought myself new sisters. I made the massive mistake of approaching the build as I had done with Warhammer minis in the distant past. Clipping all the bits off the sprue (Heads, torsos, weapons in different tubs) Only to come to the realisation that building newer models was a completely different experience. They were difficult to build and actually required following the instructions pretty carefully.
-
3
-
-
48 minutes ago, Noserenda said:
Like it means anything is silly, especially when GW is struggling to make anything right now
Which is demonstrably not the case. You don't generate a quarter of a billion pounds in revenue over 6 months by not making anything.
48 minutes ago, Noserenda said:I'd be surprised by too many human armies, they long ago discovered humans don't sell anywhere near as well as everyone else
No they didn't. Empire was always one of the biggest selling factions in Fantasy, The Imperium of man (and it's multiple human-based subfactions) are 40k biggest selling "faction" and Marines are literally the biggest selling product liine and they are... super humans. Every bit of information we have and any metric we have access to shows that human-based factions were, are and will continue to be the main profit drivers for all of GW games. Because they sell more than everyone else.
48 minutes ago, Noserenda said:I'd expect a similar low effort drop feed for their releases in a couple of years
You're definition of "low" effort seems to be pretty far removed from realities definition of it. There has been plenty showing the care, work and attention put into the system and the faction releases. The O+G release has over 20 kits returning. Which is more than some other companies aspire to release in an entire year for their entire games.
48 minutes ago, Noserenda said:paying over the odds
In relation to what? The odds are what the market can bare. Basic economics. The fact the line has sold out means that the odds... are very much in GW favour.
-
2
-
1
-
-
33 minutes ago, Ejecutor said:
Estalia and Tilea
For sure... Would love to see them explored. There's so much interesting potential in ToW.
-
2 minutes ago, Jator said:
I'm kinda bummed out by the fact that all the obvious possible new armies are just regular pseudohistorical humans.
The Old World is literally a fantasy pseudohistorical take on the real world though. 😅 It's what the setting is. I think there is a pretty significant cross-over between Warhammer fantasy rank n flank and historical wargamers. Combined with the data sets from Creative Assmebly and the Total War franchise, I think the popularity of Kislev and Grand Cathay cannot be denied.
Hopefully ToW continues to do well and over the coming years we get to not only explore Kislev, Cathay, Moot and Araby, but stuff like the Zamesi Tribes, Hobgobla-khans, The Kingon of Ind, The Hinterlands of Khuresh and the various Pirate Coasts. That would be cool.
-
1
-
-
16 minutes ago, Souleater said:
How do the ‘get them before they’re gone’ Underworld Warbands fit into the idea that plastics aren’t viable for small runs? Do we really see them being reused in combat boxes or something like Hachette’s Partworks?
Not trying to be snarky. I’m genuinely puzzled by this.
Take everything I'm about to say with a huge pinch of salt, because at the end of the day, I do not know the facts. This is my take.
Underworlds as a system and product is designed primarily for 2 reasons.
1 - To act as a small "competitive" tournament style game, allowing for GamesWorkshop to have a dog within that market. It is about disrupting an existing market and exposing individuals to the GW eco-system. The entire system might not even turn a profit, but can act as a loss-leader to generate revenue from individuals who are exposed to the GW eco-system. You like this warband? We have an entire range of similar models that you can buy. Like those models? There is an entire eco-system of other games you can enjoy. It's about market penetration and revenue generated by exposure and customer aquisition.
2- To act as a "feeder-system" to the GW eco system (AoS primarily) and market saturation. Similar to the first point, it's about exposure, it is also a direct answer to the many different game systems that have popped up over the last decade or so. GW wants to be in every single wargame sphere. It also allows for a small testing system for sculpts and ideas that can (and do) lead to greater development within AoS. If a warband sells out, is reprinted and sells out again, you can bet your bottom dollar that creative avenue will be explored in greater depth within AoS.
Games Workshop is all about complete and utter market domination. Underworlds is just a part of that.
-
2
-
-
1 minute ago, Kitsumy said:
and game will remain dead, since no new player will buy 20+ years miniatures, with lot of metal and resin in there.
You have just witnessed both Tomb King and Bretonnian ranges (with a lot of metal and resin in there) sell out. It's literally a demonstrable fact that there is a significant market for them.
-
6
-
-
9 minutes ago, HorticulusTGA said:
Vers strange...
It's not strange when you consider that Finecast, Forgeworld Resign & Metal acompletely different materials requiring completely different moulds.
11 minutes ago, HorticulusTGA said:Plastic - AOS Stone Trolls (and other AOS Trolls)
They have AoS specific details on them and there is a clear market for the older stone trolls. Take a few minutes and look back over the last few years at the crazy second hand market for these minis. Also. Again. There will be no official cross compatability between ToW and AoS. Zero, None, Nadda, Ziltch. Two different systems, Two different games. Two different studios, Two different balance sheets.
14 minutes ago, HorticulusTGA said:Also, why use ressource to remake the Orc and Goblin Giant in resin, while the WFB Plastic Giant still exist, while making the Old Old Giant Metal MTO ?
Because there is a market for them? They will sell and make money? The plastic Giant is an AoS product. The Metal MTO Giant will sell and make money. It's that simple.
13 minutes ago, Doko said:while old players are happy
literally ToWs primary market. ToW is not about recruiting new players. AoS is about recruiting new players into the GW ecosystem. They literally stated that in black and white. It's why there is no "starter set". You might not like that, you might think that is wrong, but it is as clear as crystal that is how GW sees this.
16 minutes ago, Doko said:.i think they have done a huge error,release new units for every army and sell well each army and then with time release these new armys was a better option than actual option of bad sells of core armys but hope for good sales of the new armys with the game allready dead
As a gamer I would have loved to have seen completely new plastic ranges for every ToW faction. As a bean counter I think they are playing an absolute blinder. It's actually pretty amazing what GW has been able to do from a purely buisness stand point. They took an IP that was a bloated loss leader. Blew it up and replaced it with an entirely new system. They have built that system to be many more times as successful than what went before. Kept the old IP alive through a wildly successful computer game series. Then, they have relaunched the old system with it's two previsouly most unsuccessful factions, using old models that weren't selling 10 years ago and completely sold out. (I bet you Tomb Kings and Bretonnians have made more money this month than the last several years of Fantasy combined) with minimal investment. All this in under a decade! It's a money making masterclass.
-
2
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, Ejecutor said:
Why use ressources to rescuplt resin kits but not to produce plastic kits ?
I've been reading similar comment across the interwebs and I find it interesting (and a little frustrating) that so many folk just do not seem to understand the absolute MASSIVE difference in resources required to produce resin kits compared to a plastic kit. Resin kits can be created for hundreds of pounds (a few thousand when you take labour costs into consideration) They can be created for miniature runs that may only sell a few hundred each. The ROI on a resin miniature is if that model sells a few hundred kits. A plastic kit costs 10's of thousands of pounds to create. The ROI for plastic kits is far far longer and the kit needs to sell thousands before it reaches the stage of profitability.
Resin miniatures allow for esoteric and low run miniatures to be created that would never be created in plastic. Unless/until ToW has proven to be (and continues to be) a huge financial success, then we are not going to see a huge amount of new plastic kits for ranges that already have models which can be bolstered by a handful of resin models.
I also find it interesting that people just don't seem to be able to (or willing to) read between the lines. The Battlion boxes are basically ToW answer to 40k's Combat Patrols or AoS (Spearheads) with a chunk of re-released plastic troopers that have long since moved into profitability.
These boxes are the cash injection (I know some people don't like that term) for the SDS to show significant profitability in it's first 4 quarters. It's why I am still convinced that we will see the majority of the 9 core factions released over the next 11/12 months. (If not all of them) The only real big question mark for me is how AoS is going to deal with BoC. It will either be a hard chop with the release of AoS 4 in the summer (Paving the way for ToW BoC to be released in Autumn) or a soft chop with the faction being one of the first on the block for a complete redesign soon after AoS releases. (Paving the way for ToW BoC to be released in Winter)
High Elf Realms, Wood Elf Realms, Dwarfen Mountian Holds, Warriors of Chaos & Empire of Man are all going to be getting releases very similar to this one. They have entire existing ranges which will be re-released and will get a smattering of new Resin models. There might be a plastic kit here or there if there isn't a half-decent existing kit for unit entries, but looking through all of the faction lists and what they can take, they all have existing kits that can be used.
The positive and hopeful aspect of this is, that there are CAD sculpts for new factions and units waiting in the wings ready for their injection mould plates to be made. Standing back and looking at the big picture. IF you only have the possibility to create 20 new plastic kits for the system over a 3 year period. Would you rather they were split across the 9 core factions to upgrade existing models (of which there is clearly a market for) or use those resources to release entirely new factions like Kislev, Grand Cathay, Araby or Moot?
PS: sorry for coming across a bit grumpy, I've not had my coffee yet. 😅
-
9
-
3
-
-
1 hour ago, Whitefang said:
They are coming.
OMG! New Faction called "They" confirmed!
-
3
-
-
Just woke up. Thought it was a solid showing. Even though most things aren't for me, I'm not so caught up in myself that I would describe a show as "poor" or "dissapointing" because it wasn't tailored to my specific tastes. I've never understood the position some people put themselves in - "I collect said faction, I want things for said faction, and every time GW talks about or reveals anything but stuff for that faction (which will be most of the time) I will be dissapointed" it just seems so self-defeating. Anyways... I can step back and see what is generally good for the Warhammer 4. (40k, AoS, HH, ToW) I think this was a pretty well rounded show.
The Callis & Toll warband are excellent and will 100% be picking those guys up. Really nice to see the Kroot get some love and it was cool to have a non-marine focused preview show for once.
Funnily enough, I think that the Croneseer has shown that if/when Malekith shows up, that DoK and Shadow Elves will infact be separate forces.
-
4
-
-
5 minutes ago, Tonhel said:
If a hard reset means more streamlining and removing more options than please no, because than the exodus to TOW will really start
I suppose "hard reset" carries some negative conitations. I think of it more like a "Fresh Start". With AoS 3, you have the rule book, some expansions, a narrative series and all existing factions have a Battletome. There is an art style to them and as an edition it feels "complete". Even if they keep 90% of the rules the same, having the way Battlescrolls are laid out, Battletomes are designed and a fresh art style would require a definitive break from 3rd and the beginning of 4th. I'm not even sure if this is the best way of going about things, and as I said, I might be completely wrong, I just feel like that is the way we are heading.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Beliman said:
It's not about that, and nobody says that it's impossible to accomplish all boxes in 12 months (pretty sure that GW can do that). But the point is that there are a lot more things going on appart from "take the old moulds, clean a bit, and ready to go".
Yeah, and they have been working on that side of things for 4/5 years. I also think it is perfectly reasonable to expect second waves and future support for factions in 2025/26 etc. In terms of a Battalion Box with 1 new Plastic model, Dice set and Arcane Journal, with a smattering of resin/metal kits as direct only? Yeah. My money is still on the 9 core getting that in 2024 or into early 2025 at the latest.
-
2
-
-
3 minutes ago, pnkdth said:
That sounded a lot less cynical than you first framed it, i.e. massive cash injection, which lead me down the path of assuming not so free rules but rather to wring as much as possible out of each new reset/edition.
It's ok for a company to make money yah know! I want GW to have massive cash injections. I want the company to be successful. I want people, to want, to spend money with GW. I think it is a great company.
-
4 minutes ago, pnkdth said:
That's one heck of a depressing thought. I don't think I would buy a single tome ever again if they go that hard into monetising their players. I probably would end up selling off everything I own and boycott GW. I understand that "GW is a business" but that's miles past the line of what I'd find acceptable.
Really? As someone who still playes multiple different editions of 40k and Fantasy I quite like the idea of an edition being a "complete" thing before moving onto the next. I was never really a fan of having some factions not getting an edition update. I don't see it being that problematic if the PDF's are avalible at the start of the edition for free like in 40k 10th.
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Deakz28 said:
There was no indexes in 9th, 7th to 8th had indexes, 8th to 9th was akin to 2nd to 3rd AOS, no indexes continue with what you have. It seems to be every other edition for 40K has a index style reset being 8th and now 10th
Yikes... you are correct. My memory is failing me. I was thinking of 7th to 8th.
-
2 minutes ago, Deakz28 said:
On 9th edition you could still use 8th Ed books, it wasn’t a hard reset,
It was pretty hard. With the Index books, which I think lead them to the super hard 10th edition (and what I think we will see going forward) Let's call it a semi-reset then. 😉
-
6 minutes ago, flying_dutchman said:
Tbf that's only because 10th was a hard restart
As was 9th. I might be completely wrong about this but I suspect GW has pivoted to "New Edition = Reset" for 40k+AoS. It just makes so much sense from a financial perspective. Everyone goes out to buy new indexes, cards, etc and it allows for the edition to be approached holistically from the outset. It's a massive cash injection, that I think is too hard to pass up. Again, I may be wrong but I think we will see a full AoS 4 reset (I also think this is why they have released all the Battletombs with several months to spare to minimise backlash from books only being viable for that edition for a couple of months.)
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, MitGas said:
I do believe to have read that GW designers have a certain freedom when it comes to pitching/creating things, so many releases aren‘t what‘s needed but what they want to work on, which explains some of the less „tactical“ releases. I mean, they are very likely aware what‘s lacking and what an optimal release schedule would look like but I figure around 30% of releases are basically whatever they want them to be….
Whilst this can be a bit frustrating as a customer, when there are things that clearly need TLC and are left to wither on the vine. As an individual who works in a creative industry, I do think it is pretty admirable that GW has a pretty clear line between it's designers/creatives and the bean counters.
Of course there will be projects that "need" to be done, but the best work from creatives always comes from allowing them freedom to explore and work on stuff that grabs their attention and gets their creative juices flowing.
It's a delicate balancing act, which is very difficult to get right, I actually think that GW doesn't get enough credit for this, as many people (understandably) just want what they want and don't see why GW just doesn't make it, now!
-
3
-
-
I actually don't buy into the "This is logistically imposssible" argument in regards to a potential 12 month ToW release schedule. The army boxes being released for the remaining 7 factions (Going by rumours they are called Battalions) and will not include the rulebook or other gaming accessories. So essentially it's like releasing 7 Combat Patrols for 40k or Vanguard/Spearhead boxes for AoS across the following 11 months! With a development lead of 4/5 years and containing 90%+ existing older plastic kits. The metal/resin models are Direct only (and MTO is a different kettle of fish with up to 180 days to fill orders).
You also need to condsider what the SDS actually has on their slate. Necromunda is pretty much a "complete" range. Apart from the occasional release and book I don't see the system getting much over the forseeable future. Frankly, some of the gang ranges are approaching the scale and scope of some 40k/AoS factions, how much more are they really going to add here? If you go to Warhammer.com the vast majority of the system is also in stock. The same can be said for Bloodbowl, MESBG, etc
The Horus Heresy is under the wing of the main design studio. The same as Kill Team, Warcry, Quest...
So SDS basically has Legions Imperialis and ToW. Legions Imperialis had a great launch. A lot of the line needs new stock. However, the main box is in stock. It is also faily limited in terms of development space.
I still personally think that we will see the 9 core factions get their Battalion/Arcane Journal + 2/3 plastic kits (Rereleases+new) + 2/3 Resin kits in 2024. With 2025 seeing additions and second waves.
-
2
-
1
-
-
I think it makes a lot of sense to have the 9 core factions released in 2024. It allows for the game/setting to become "established", maintains the hype train across the year and for 2025 to be focused on expansions and additions. (It would be amazing to see Kislev in the first half of 2025 and Cathay in the Second half of the year)
-
2
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Flippy said:
I really like Warcry, but the initial focus on Chaos warbands was holding the game back. The recent approach with the Hunters of Huanchi serving double duty (not just random addition to Seraphon, but an integral element of the army book) is much, much better.
I agree, and it is great to see the system, setting and squads evolve over time. I do think that the success of the system was partially due to it being so Chaos heavy at the beginning (As previously mentioned, Chaos is a very popular faction) So in some ways, the heavy Chaos leaning in the beginning has allowed for the system to expand into giving other factions a look in.
I do hope that the next WarCry setting is a settlement of some kind. The Gnarlwood is ok but lacked personality IMO.
-
I've said the exact same thing in regard to what the potential ToW roadmap looks like. Makes perfect sense to me. Get the core 9 factions out of the gate in 2024. Allowing for expansions and updates in 2025 and beyond.
-
I think people are overlooking WarCry as it's own system. (Which is a lot of fun) Yes STD has a lot of options that can be used from WarCry but Warcry is it's own thing, not just a means to add to AoS armies.
-
8
-
Warhammer - The Old World
in Warhammer: The Old World
Posted
I used Adobe as I have it for work. There are dozens of free programs avalible which you can use to convert. Just google epub to pdf converter.