Holy Crap! Dreams really do come true!

Winterblight

Legendary Member
Joined
May 26, 2018
Messages
213
Reaction score
337
Sooo I lost almost all interest in WHFB when I heard they had blown up the old world. I couldn't even read about it, I couldn't bear the thought. Does this mean they are sticking it all back together again?
 

TristramEvans

The Right Hand of Doom
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2017
Messages
9,926
Reaction score
21,062
Sooo I lost almost all interest in WHFB when I heard they had blown up the old world. I couldn't even read about it, I couldn't bear the thought. Does this mean they are sticking it all back together again?

They said they're treating it like Forgeworld's Horus Heresy line to 40K. Confirmed the return of rank & file with square bases. So I'd expect a line of VERY expensive books with a streamlined version of the original WFB rules
 

CRKrueger

Legendary Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2017
Messages
2,521
Reaction score
4,168
Hmm, some people actually don’t like New Coke, who’d a fucking thunk it?

When the jackass who first thought up Age of Sigmar has done the Cersei Walk of Shame through Nottingham, being pelted with refuse and sewage, having his feet torn and worried by small but vicious dogs, ending with a beheading by a replica of Gotrek’s Axe...

THEN and only then, will the Book of Grudges be closed.
 

Simlasa

Legendary Member
Joined
May 4, 2017
Messages
1,315
Reaction score
2,151
Hmm, some people actually don’t like New Coke, who’d a fucking thunk it?
I'd assumed AOS was doing fine... was it not?
Not that I didn't hear complaints, but I assumed those folks would follow along as they're told anyway... because otherwise, it's not a problem to just keep playing in the original setting.
 

TristramEvans

The Right Hand of Doom
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2017
Messages
9,926
Reaction score
21,062
Hmm, some people actually don’t like New Coke, who’d a fucking thunk it?

When the jackass who first thought up Age of Sigmar has done the Cersei Walk of Shame through Nottingham, being pelted with refuse and sewage, having his feet torn and worried by small but vicious dogs, ending with a beheading by a replica of Gotrek’s Axe...

THEN and only then, will the Book of Grudges be closed.
He left the company about 5 years ago now, so I'm not sure that Grudge will ever be satisfied.


I'd assumed AOS was doing fine... was it not?
AOS is doing very well, by all accounts.
 

FeralToaster

Legendary Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2019
Messages
792
Reaction score
850
Good business sense is what it is. The hard end and shelving of old Warhammer gave breathing space for the new Age of Sigmar to develop a new independent fan base. In that intervening period their savvy use of video game licenses got people who might not otherwise of been interested in the retired Warhammer stuff interested in a game that is no longer readily available (thus creating a new demand for their IP while letting another company do the hard work of building a video game). Now GW can sell their old stuff to the new video game audience while still keeping the center spotlights on Age of Sigmar and 40K. Now My book club can enjoy Age of Sigmar, Horus Heresy, 40k, and Bloodball while also skimming the best bits of the old stuff.
 

Ladybird

TRAHR
Joined
Aug 13, 2017
Messages
2,065
Reaction score
3,936
I'm not really sure what you could take away from the WHFB rules to streamline it; the core of the game is the movement phase, which needs technical rules, and the combat rules are already about as simple as they could be.

But the big problems they need to solve are finding an accessible entry point for the game - the editions I played just didn't work at much under a thousand points, and a full-sized army requires a lot of generic figures which are a thing GW just doesn't really do any more; their "everyone is an individual" modern style is really cool, but when you're doing units all that bling just gets in the way. And then there's the cost issue...

So good luck to them, but I think it's a game that's had it's time.
 

TristramEvans

The Right Hand of Doom
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2017
Messages
9,926
Reaction score
21,062
I'm not really sure what you could take away from the WHFB rules to streamline it;

compare the current edition of 40K to the previous. 8th edition of WFB was a bloated mess. The errata for the game was thicker than the rules section of the core book. Power creep between army books distorted editions like 6th and 7th that had well-designed streamlined cores.

There's a reason that 6th edition + Ravening Hordes is considered one of the most balanced games GW ever put out (I'd personally say only Warmaster succeeded better)


the core of the game is the movement phase, which needs technical rules, and the combat rules are already about as simple as they could be.
WFB is classic exception-based design. The issue was always the various special rules of specific armies and how these interacted with or warped the basic rules.

But the big problems they need to solve are finding an accessible entry point for the game - the editions I played just didn't work at much under a thousand points, and a full-sized army requires a lot of generic figures which are a thing GW just doesn't really do any more; their "everyone is an individual" modern style is really cool, but when you're doing units all that bling just gets in the way. And then there's the cost issue...

So good luck to them, but I think it's a game that's had it's time.
Well I certainly don't think they are going to recreate 8th edition. That would be absurd.
 

David Johansen

Legendary Member
Joined
May 4, 2017
Messages
1,447
Reaction score
1,689
Eighth edition got two things wrong for everything it got right. Still, the big issues I see are keeping the core game about forces around 50 figures. The bigger and bigger armies approach just made it hard to get into. Also, the turn sequence needs to be kept as simple as possible. Eighth was the height of sequential absurdity so many steps that had to be done in exactly the right order. I don't know how I feel about random charge ranges and not having chargers strike first. Melee sequence was the worst sequence offender. I'd go right back to always strikes first, initiative, two handed weapons. Also only the front rank attacks but the second rank pushes in so you still strike back if you've got guys left. It's not much fun to have your front rank wiped out and not be able to strike back.

Better still, play Warlords of Erewhon! Kings of War is good at really big battles but Warlords of Erewhon is lots of fun. Heck second edition Battle System, Legendary Battles, Hordes of the Things. What Warhammer did that they don't is hit a broader range from skirmishes to mass battles. Hopefully GW can see that it should be the game that can be all things to all people.
 

FeralToaster

Legendary Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2019
Messages
792
Reaction score
850
But the big problems they need to solve are finding an accessible entry point for the game - the editions I played just didn't work at much under a thousand points, and a full-sized army requires a lot of generic figures which are a thing GW just doesn't really do any more; their "everyone is an individual" modern style is really cool, but when you're doing units all that bling just gets in the way. And then there's the cost issue...
I'd say the entry points are Total War: Warhammer 1&2 both are ranked 86 and 87 on metacritic with a bunch of DLC each (because EA). Large scale battles to practice a person's favorite army. Of course the old Warhammer will never sell as well as the heavy hitters but it'll sell well enough for a niche game with the video gamers that want a physical copy of their favorite army.
 

soltakss

Legendary Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2017
Messages
998
Reaction score
1,426
I once knew a chap who suffered from really bad, very vivid nightmares. One Christmas, he was sent a Christmas Card from an elderly friend, who wrote "May all your dreams come true" and I have never seen anyone turn as white as he did. He would have hated the title of this thread.
 

TristramEvans

The Right Hand of Doom
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2017
Messages
9,926
Reaction score
21,062
I didn't think 8th edition was bad, but I agree with many of the complaints. I don't think it's as bad as "2 things wrong, with every one thing right, but I've never tallied it up, so let me do that...

Things I disliked -

1. Size of effective units. I played Skaven. What this meant was, that for a competitive minimum force (2000 points, because the game was horribly unbalanced below that point, and I don't have the 6 -8 hours free time to play 3K or higher) that meant two blocks of 50 slaves, 3 units of at least 40 clanrats, 1 or more unit of 30-40 Stormvermin...and already that is 250 miniatures, add another 50 in special units, characters, and warmachines. Some armies didn't have it THAT bad...Skaven are a horde army after all...but GW's pricing structure made damn sure you were still paying the same amount.

I could almost (alllllllmost) forgive those punks at the GW store playing with unpainted minis.

And, to be frank, I did use unit fillers.

1b. Ultimately I will say though, that the amount of minis wasn't my main problem. I actually really liked the visual spectacle of two huge forces clashing on the battlefield. Moreso, it was that it was so many of the same models. Armies had a lot of unit choices, but a large portion of them were useless, or sub-optimal so that you were willingly putting yourself at a disadvantage fielding them. This unfortunately generally included the majority of "centerpiece" models. Those huge, monsters that are really fun to paint and cost 300 points to field? Yeah, sorry, taken out by cannons in the first round. Want to include a Verminlord? Yeah, sorry, no, not unless you're playing a 5000 point game and can afford to throw away 600 points on a cool looking model that will be gone by the third round. Slaves and Clanrats are the same models, and while there was a good variety of sculpts between Island of Blood and the Clanrat box, that is still months of painting 200 of the same unit figures. I got really good at painting Skaven, but I cannot say that I was getting anywhere near the enjoyment of painting my 150th Clanrat as I did the first 10 to 20.

2. The rulebook was HORRIBLY written and laid out. I mentioned previously the errata was as thick as the actual rules section. So much so, that they really should have just rewritten 8th and put out an 8.5 at some point during the game's life. What this meant was the game had a STEEP learning curve. I think, of the manymany games I played, there were probably only a handful of times (if that) that we didn't discover after the game that we had done something wrong. Not because any of my gaming circle were cheating, but because the rules were just so unclear and badly organized, and contained so many exceptions spread out nonsensically.

3. Multiple armies never got an update. That includes Skaven - I was stuck the entire life cycle of that game with a rulebook written for the previous edition. Armies like Breetonnia were even worse - I think they were still using a 6th edition army book. Which also sorta ties into...

3b. The armies were completely unbalanced. There was no oversight committee - the author of any given armybook basically did what they wanted, with the only caveat that the newest miniatures had to have the BEST rules, so they'd sell better. There was NO consistency, and some armies were lavished with effective rules, and others were like the neglected stepchildren . Think those Beastmen look cool? Sorry, your army sucks, and GW doesn't care, because dwarves sell better. Oh yeah, and that STEEP learning curve mentioned earlier? Well that applies here as well, because nobody is going to tell you that your choice of army sucks. You have to drop a grand on minis, spend weeks lavishing them with paint, and then field them long enough to realize that your inexperience and lack of familiarity with the rules isn't the reason you're constantly losing - your army just isn't as good as your opponent's. Compare THAT experience to the anger you felt when Monty Cook wrote about putting "trap options" in an RPG...

IV. So that also ties into the lack of an "entry point" for new players. I have mixed feelings about this one. I agree with the criticism, but I entered the game with 8th, after the ten years since I last put paintbrush to lead. So, there was an entry point, it was just a veryvery steep one - a mountain of money and time, as it were. And no, that's not a good thing. It's not a good thing that the "starter box" for the game didn't give two playable beginner forces - as a Skaven player it was just a cheap way to get clanrats. I bought 4 Island of Blood boxes and traded out 3 of the high elf halves for Skaven halves. That's what the "starter box" was for - it was essentially the equivalent of AOS's "start collecting" boxes.

5, Lack of customization. This was maybe the biggest one for me. I want my army, to be my army. I appreciate GW has some of the best fluff in fantasy wargaming (maybe fantasy as a genre overall) history. But I have an imagination too. I have an urge to customize, to create. Part of this is coming from a background as a roleplayer. But more than that, is that I started Warhammer with 3rd edition, and edition where you made your own characters, built your own units, even designed your own war machines. In 8th, the best you could do was decide on a magic item loadout for your generals. Of course, AOS would be way worse in that regard, but I still rankled at this.

6. The game's rules didn't match the fluff. Like, at all. I understood the need for compromise in the name of playability and balance, but the descriptions of units and creatures almost universally had no relationship to the statline and usefulness of the models in the game. Your armybook tells you that you are fielding badass warriors of the type legends are written, powerful monsters that strike terror in the hearts of all that face them, devastating weapons of war...and in game terms, that often meant "cannon fodder".

7. And then we get to what I really dislike about 8th edition the most. While I don't think 8th is, at it's heart, an overly complex game. - the organization, writing, and errata made it difficult to learn and implement the rules, but ultimately the rules were a very tight evolution of the Warhammer system ; nor will I ever claim it wasn't fun - I had an enormous amount of enjoyment playing 8th, and it effectively re-ignited my interest in miniature wargaming overall. To this day, there are times I miss it.

However, I am of the opinion that the ultimate goal of a wargamng system should be to provide a means of simulating warfare, even with the inclusion of fantasy elements such as magic and inhuman species. I am of the opinion that A general's ability to win should depend on superior tactical decisions, being clever and adaptable, and employing strategies just as a general in their position, in that world, would do so. And this is where 8th fails most spectacularly. You win 8th edition by gaming the system. "Tactics" are based on exploiting loopholes in the rules, strategies means correctly "list-building". 3rd edition is far away the most complex, most crunchy, and most unbalanced edition of the game, but it went out of it's way to add "real" military tactics and formations to the game. 8th is almost the opposite in this regard,; it is a "eurogame" to 3rd's "ameritrash"., and that ultimately means that when you play 8th edition, you are not playing the general of a fantasy army in the Warhammer world, you are simply playing a game.

Things I liked -

1. The magic system. To this day my favourite of any in any miniature wargame I've played or read. Simple, evocative, not a replacement for troops - you cannot win the game with any spell - but still impressive and powerful. It "feels" magical, which few magic systems even in RPGs even manage to pull off. And it does it without points or cards.

2. The focus on infantry. Unlike certain previous editions, core infantry is no longer just a "tax" paid just to field a legal army. Standard Core choices ultimately decide the battle,and thanks to steadfast and no more ‘front rank wipe’, anyone attacking a block of infantry needs to have a plan in place, and hit them with multiple units. No more opportunistic cavalry charges unrealistically breaking a mass of infantry three times their size.

2b. And on that same note, no more "Herohammer". Characters in 8th played the proper role of support, and you no longer had single powerful individuals that couldn't be killed, wading through hordes of infantry.

3. Random charges. I know some aren’t keen on this, but I find it adds much more strategy to the movement phase. Prior editions, one could comfortably hold their cavalry at 9″ away from most Infantry., and they could do nothing about it. Now rather than being used simply for hurling them into the first combat you can, and hoping for a ‘front rank wipe’, that increased movement is better off actually maneuvering into an advantageous position, to support a later combined charge.

3b. Add to that pre-measuring, and the the game overall played so much faster, without the headache of constantly trying to estimate inches, and the frustration of failed charges because your eyeballing of the gameboard was off by a quarter an inch.

IV. Artillery and shooting no longer dominates the game. You can do some damage to a unit, take out big single monsters, but your shooting is not going to win the entire game. The focus, once again, is on infantry, with ranged attacks in the role of support.

5. The glorious risk-reward subsystems. This particularly defined Skaven - there were so many opportunities to ""gamble", in proper chaotic Skaven fashion. Your Ratling gun could blow themselves up, or deal a ridiculous number of shots. Your doomwheel could charge into the flank of a horde, grinding and unleashing lightning, or it could fly off the edge of the table. Feeding some Slaves a bottle of Skavenbrew might turn them into savage beserkers, or just poison the lot of them.Technology and magic was volatile and unreliable, and this added so many surprises to the game that it was just as enjoyable to win or lose.

6. As mentioned before, regardless of how much effort went into painting, and how many ridiculous GW prices had to be paid, the spectacle of an 8th edition game was just breathtaking. I know Skirmish games are all the rage, but nothing satisfies me from a wargame more than the clash of huge armies on the board. 8th looked and felt like a battle between 2 armies,

7.Ultimately, the rules were fun. This is my counterpoint to my main complaint about the game. As much as I disliked that the game was not about real-world military tactics, however many loopholes the system left to be exploited, and regardless of how badly the rules were written, I enjoyed playing it immensely. More than I've ever enjoyed a game of AoS, more than I've ever enjoyed a game of 40K, and more than I've ever enjoyed a game of KoW. 8th edition was visceral, charming, flavourful, and epic. Every third party alternative I've tried has been a veggieburger to WFB's quarter pounder.


So, none of that is me advocating for a return of 8th edition. It was what it was, and it had it's time. There was plenty to criticize, and plenty to love. I have no clue what this new game will be, but I don't think it's going to be a "9th edition" or a continuation of 8th in any way. I HOPE it takes the classic WFB system, and does a new iteration of that, one that's streamlined, play-tested, and sustainable, in the same way that Horus Heresy has stuck with an older 40K system and exists separate from the edition treadmill. I HOPE that it's not just a rank and file variation of AoS, I think that would be a disaster. I HOPE that it's an oppurtunity to explore areas of the Warhammer world that were largely ignored or left barely fleshed-out (Kiev, Cathay, Nippon). I HOPE it embraces the dark humour that WFB once embodied. I HOPE it's an opportunity to revisit forgotten Warhammer creations, like Zoats and Fimir. And I HOPE it combines the balance, creativity, and DIY ethos of 6th edition, the customization of 3rd edition, and the good parts of 8th edition.

But, as they say, hope and 25 cents will get you a lollipop. I'm glad the Old World is coming back, but I don't put any stock in what I hope, I'll just wait and see.
 

David Johansen

Legendary Member
Joined
May 4, 2017
Messages
1,447
Reaction score
1,689
I think just returning to third edition might be the best answer. Sure it's got faults but it's a gloriously swingy, random game where the army books haven't entrenched the herohammer issues so much.

I bought the first edition boxed set when I was about 12 and while it was neat there were no pictures and I couldn't imagine anyone had twenty miniatures to build a unit. I don't think I ever saw second edition outside of the Dragon ad. My cousin had third edition so I read that. I got into playing seriously with a fifth edition Lizardmen army that I then sold to build the core of my fifth edition Empire Army. I did have Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay and Warhammer 40000 Rogue Trader. 40000 is really one of my break points with GW, every time I managed to collect enough stuff to play they did a new edition and invalidated my army list :sad: At one point I had Empire, Bretonians, Beastmen, Orcs, and Imperial Guard and Space Orks armies. I also played Mordheim. I've got a Warmaster Empire army but never really got anywhere with it.
 

TristramEvans

The Right Hand of Doom
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2017
Messages
9,926
Reaction score
21,062
Warmaster is, IMO, the best game GW ever put out. Despite it's simplicity, it PERFECTLY captures the unique flavour of each army, so no army plays in the exact same way and requires it's own unique tactics. Plus, there are like triple the army options of WFB.

I'm currently basing all my new minis for playing Warmaster in 28mm scale.
 

Ladybird

TRAHR
Joined
Aug 13, 2017
Messages
2,065
Reaction score
3,936
I'd say the entry points are Total War: Warhammer 1&2 both are ranked 86 and 87 on metacritic with a bunch of DLC each (because EA). Large scale battles to practice a person's favorite army. Of course the old Warhammer will never sell as well as the heavy hitters but it'll sell well enough for a niche game with the video gamers that want a physical copy of their favorite army.
Entry points into the franchise, yes, the video games are pretty good. But it's an entry point into the tabletop game that I see as being an issue, because WHFB doesn't scale down well like 40k does and, as @TristramEvans points out above, an army is a huge amount of work. It's also relatively boring work compared to games with more distinct line troopers, because so many of them need to look basically identical to form a cohesive unit but are effectively just wound markers for the front rank.

And yeah, when you've got two big painted armies going off against each other Warhammer is awesome. It's just fun to move big blocks of troops around like that, and because there's so much open information, when you out-manoeuvre your opponent you feel like a genius.

There's clearly a market for a massed battle relatively generic fantasy war game, I'm just not sure it's big enough for GW to seriously invest in.

I never played Warmaster, but I wish I had, because it sounds like it perfects a lot of the things Warhammer tried to do.
 

FeralToaster

Legendary Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2019
Messages
792
Reaction score
850
There's clearly a market for a massed battle relatively generic fantasy war game, I'm just not sure it's big enough for GW to seriously invest in.
Ah, but there lies the brilliance of Games Workshop strategy. They don't have to put serious resources into this venture, they already own the old moulds of the minis and because nostalgia and vintage are both serious marketing elements across gaming cultures the older art aesthetics have an audience with the same passion (if not size) as the awesome looking stuff from AoS has. Now how long before we see Man'O War back on the shelf?
 

Simlasa

Legendary Member
Joined
May 4, 2017
Messages
1,315
Reaction score
2,151
So I wonder if this means they'll start making the Tomb Kings figures again? Some of those I'd like to get for somewhere less than the silly prices on Ebay.

I've got a few big armies for playing 3rd edition WFB... but any newer stuff I've bought has been aimed at non-GW skirmish games.
Any future big army fantasy games I get into would have to be scaled at 15mm or smaller (which can be done, with a bit of work, with WFB of course).
 

TristramEvans

The Right Hand of Doom
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2017
Messages
9,926
Reaction score
21,062
I've considered doing 15mm for WFB myself. Alot of good, cheap options out there.
 
Last edited:

Simlasa

Legendary Member
Joined
May 4, 2017
Messages
1,315
Reaction score
2,151
I've consodered doing 15mm for WFB myself. Alot of good, cheap options out there.
Demonworld is a good line of Warhammer-ish stuff... but yeah, there are now loads of excellent 15mm fantasy and scifi figures available.
 

David Johansen

Legendary Member
Joined
May 4, 2017
Messages
1,447
Reaction score
1,689
I think it would be good if they rolled beastmen back into chaos and tomb kings back into undead and crammed all the army lists into the core book.
 

Ladybird

TRAHR
Joined
Aug 13, 2017
Messages
2,065
Reaction score
3,936
I think it would be good if they rolled beastmen back into chaos and tomb kings back into undead and crammed all the army lists into the core book.
I liked the warlord / warband system that 5e Chaos used (Buy a hero, then give them at least that many points worth of troops from their subfaction, repeat). Gors made a solid infantry block, which I really needed for my Chaos Warriors army as I never took to marauders (If I wanted to field Dave Bloke, I'd have played Empire). You could specialise Warriors / Beastmen / Daemons as your entire army, or mix it up pretty freely.
 

TristramEvans

The Right Hand of Doom
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2017
Messages
9,926
Reaction score
21,062
I agree that Beastmen should be part of Chaos. I think Tomb Kings are distinct enough that they stand on their own as an army, but I guess I could see an overall Undead where you define the style of your army by what general you take,

As the compariosn was made to Horus Heresy by GW themselves, I doubt we'll see all the army lists in one books, but it might be likely that we'll get compendiums of multiple armies under one umbrella - maybe like the Grand Alliance books from the start of AoS.

Of course, with what little information we're going on, it could be this is a stand-alone boardgame...
 

David Johansen

Legendary Member
Joined
May 4, 2017
Messages
1,447
Reaction score
1,689
What Warhammer Fantasy Battle really has to offer is a unified standard. Some people like Kings of War, others Armies of Arcanna, or a fantasy version of Pike and Shotte, or Warlords of Erewhon. I wish Fanticide had gotten proper support for more generic armies as the card based activation was entertaining and the sin based objectives and scenarios were hilarious. I've always thought standard D&D combat should support miniatures battles, the tools are there but the implementation isn't. Not battle system, just D&D combat with 200 figures on the table.

But to really get people playing one game, a clean and solid implementation of Warhammer that really is Warhammer and not some designer's home brew with a Warhammer logo on it, would be really nice to have.
 
Top