The Rumour Thread

[Tonhel]

Well that's a very unimpressive week.

About TOW selling good or bad. We will know soon with the upcoming financial report. The initial release was a huge succes, GW even pointed it out "with the scope of the project has changed sentence". So this should be reflected in the financial report.

I don't think O&G are selling well, but that is easily explained as AoS has much better mini's that can be used for O&G armies. With TK and Bretonnian there weren't any official GW mini's that are better or available.

The dwarfs will be very interesting to see. More new resin mini's and even a new plastic set + the battalion is actually good compared with the O&G battalion box, which was very unattractive.

I don't think Warcry sells very good. It seems their latest box set just disappeared after a couple of months, afaik it never sold out. While the 40K KT box was sold out on pre-order day.

We will see what the future brings for Warcry and Underworlds. I hope it stays, the mini's are super cool. it would be a shame to lose them.

The 3 month window for Warcry Briar and Bone and the TOW: Dwarfs has passed so a small article from GW about it would be nice.

 

 

 

[Tonhel]

4 minutes ago, Ejecutor said:

The whole honour guard part should have been part of the core rules.

[ScionOfOssia]

22 minutes ago, Tonhel said:

good. It seems their latest box set just disappeared after a couple of months, afaik it never sold out.

There was approximately 0 hype for it besides maybe one guy on the Discord. The Nighthaunt were pretty easy to kitbash instead of buying apparently and the Lumineth had a mixture of hideous suspenders, mediocre gameplay, and general lack of “Wow!” factor to draw people in like the Monsta Killaz or Vulkyn Flameseekers could. B&B seems likely to sell better assuming they don’t delay it until we’ve turned to bones ourselves, and after that there’s still releases for some fairly popular factions before the cycle is complete. 

[Sahrial]

Sent on discord 

[Dragon-knight77]

5 hours ago, DinoJon said:

I'm excited for tomorrow most of all but hopefully it's Dwarves and Warcry announced today for folks. 

Well ....... at least it Seraphon faction focus tomorrow. May the Great plan strive

 

[dmorley21]

39 minutes ago, Sahrial said:

Sent on discord 

They had already revealed this. I know because I played it last week with the new scoring, terrain map, and commands and 3rd edition rules the rest of the way. 

[Gitzdee]

2 hours ago, Sahrial said:

Sent on discord 

Why does it say 2016 on top?

[Urauloth]

I think battleplans all have a tag now with the year they were introduced.

[novakai]

8 hours ago, Talas said:

I guess people just don't buy TOW's minis.

I know a few online retailer said the last few release have been selling poorly for Old world 

[Mutton]

Turns out selling 20-year-old models at premium prices for a hyper-dense game system isn't a great idea. Oh yeah, and 80% of the factions aren't even available to be purchased, which only incentivizes buying used or 3d printing.

[Neverchosen]

2 minutes ago, Mutton said:

Turns out selling 20-year-old models at premium prices for a hyper-dense game system isn't a great idea. Oh yeah, and 80% of the factions aren't even available to be purchased, which only incentivizes buying used or 3d printing.

Hey, I need Old World to succeed long enough to get my Aelves and Duardin models for my Cities of Sigmar Army.

[Ookami]

20 minutes ago, Neverchosen said:

Hey, I need Old World to succeed long enough to get my Aelves and Duardin models for my Cities of Sigmar Army.

As long as aelves and duardin are in CoS 😄

[01rtb01]

15 hours ago, Snarff said:

Thats true. But still double big releases are not a good idea, especially if there are players who would like to buy both. Buying 2 big boxes is a lot more expensive than 1.

Also, didn't Leviathan get another made to order run? Thats more what I intended, so there is room for that for Skaventide too if necessary.

In fairness the old world dwarf release is peanuts compared with a new AoS edition dropping 

[DinoJon]

54 minutes ago, Neverchosen said:

Hey, I need Old World to succeed long enough to get my Aelves and Duardin models for my Cities of Sigmar Army.

Man, I really hope that GW learns the right lessons from any stumbles the Old World has. 

It's not that people don't want to play it. It's that people don't want a game with outdated models. That has decided, what seems as arbitrarily, to not include new models from AoS or whole factions. 

 

[Big Kim Woof-Woof]

I'm really hoping that the likes of the Chaos Warshrine and the Slaanesh Hellstriders don't get booted out of AoS because they're Fantasy kits. 

[Tonhel]

28 minutes ago, DinoJon said:

Man, I really hope that GW learns the right lessons from any stumbles the Old World has. 

It's not that people don't want to play it. It's that people don't want a game with outdated models. That has decided, what seems as arbitrarily, to not include new models from AoS or whole factions. 

 

Exactly, I think the TOW ruleset is one if not the best versions they have done for a Warhammer ruleset. It's imo much better than 6th, 7th and 8th. So far the ruleset and the released armylists / arcane journals are very good. The problem is that a lot of mini's are unavailable (and old). Even with Bretonnia it is still impossible for a new player to play the game when he wants to use only GW mini's. Some of the characters, grail knights, trebuchet, yeoman, pilgrims and etc are still temporarly out of stock.

In short the ruleset is golden, their release tactics are a mess.

Edited June 17 by Tonhel

[Big Kim Woof-Woof]

23 minutes ago, Tonhel said:

 Some of the characters, grail knights, trebuchet, yeoman, pilgrims and etc are still temporarly out of stock.

Gods know why... who the hell is buying up, at top dollar, models as uninspiring as the Mounted Yeomen? 

[Ookami]

Maybe GW understand that most of the players will opt for AoS models/3d printing and thus don’t care so much for old stuff releases and sales. Rules and indices are already there, everyone can go and play TOW. And we can’t see how much stuff is purchased beyond those old models. Only by players quantity and inflow of newcomers. 
 

My guess is that old stuff promoted also to rival with ebay sellers. At least GW pricing is much more adequate. 
 

Btw fun fact - old gargant costs more than new mancrusher one. 

[Beliman]

11 hours ago, Ejecutor said:

So, a new "customization" option to pick when the game starts. GOOD!

Let's look at each ability:

• Special Assignment: -1 Rend vs one keyword for melee units (if charged). If a unit with Warmaster must be your general, but unlocks all units for their detachment, it seems that would be perfect to make that punchy unit, a bit more punchy. All that -2 rend units are going to be a lot more scary if they have a delivery tool.
• Priority target: Good ol'Barak-Zon bonus, but for one unit. Seems awesome for the right target, I can see an elite/monster unit with good rend and high damage profile to be really scary with 2+/2+ or something like that. As RAW, it seems that it affects ranged and melee profiles, that will drastically improve ranged units in to an "elite range" profiles.
• Bodyguard: It's the less flashy ability of the pack, but I think it will be terrifying at the right hands. Units with any bodyguard ability (take damage from a nearby hero) are going to become really strong. I can see some crazy combos with [etheral] + [-1 attack] + [bodyguard] + [ressurect mechanic] for a crazy anvil (spirit hosts comes to my mind).

Imho, that's the right stuff to introduce for AoS. I'm with @Tonhel that this needs to be somehow part of the Core Rules. Some type of "Veteran abilities" to improve (or change rol) our basic Infantry. Armies with low number of units will be highly improved, and we have a lot of them.

Edited June 17 by Beliman

[Ejecutor]

6 hours ago, Gitzdee said:

Why does it say 2016 on top?

Because they are reusing the old Battleplans that were most liked, I think it was mentioned in one of the articles and included a few examples.

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

1 hour ago, Beliman said:

So, a new "customization" option to pick when the game starts. GOOD!

Let's look at each ability:

• Special Assignment: -1 Rend vs one keyword for melee units (if charged). If a unit with Warmaster must be your general, but unlocks all units for their detachment, it seems that would be perfect to make that punchy unit, a bit more punchy. All that -2 rend units are going to be a lot more scary if they have a delivery tool.
• Priority target: Good ol'Barak-Zon bonus, but for one unit. Seems awesome for the right target, I can see an elite/monster unit with good rend and high damage profile to be really scary with 2+/2+ or something like that. As RAW, it seems that it affects ranged and melee profiles, that will drastically improve ranged units in to an "elite range" profiles.
• Bodyguard: It's the less flashy ability of the pack, but I think it will be terrifying at the right hands. Units with any bodyguard ability (take damage from a nearby hero) are going to become really strong. I can see some crazy combos with [etheral] + [-1 attack] + [bodyguard] + [ressurect mechanic] for a crazy anvil (spirit hosts comes to my mind).

Imho, that's the right stuff to introduce for AoS. I'm with @Tonhel that this needs to be somehow part of the Core Rules. Some type of "Veteran abilities" to improve (or change rol) our basic Infantry. Armies with low number of units will be highly improved, and we have a lot of them.

The timing of "During Deployment" is really impactful here. It especially makes Special Assignment a lot more interesting as a tool for dealing with skew lists. As long as you have a fast melee hammer in your General's Regiment, you can always pick the exact silver bullet you need at the start of battle. Seems like another piece of the puzzle of allowing spam, but nudging people more towards mixed arms, "looks like an army" type lists. This is actually what I personally wished for instead of battlefield roles/army composition for a long time: Rules that make you want to bring a varied list emergently rather than by restriction. I think it's much more elegant that "we know infantry is bad so we just force you to bring it".

Of course, bodyguard and priority target seem great, too. You can slap priority target on a big bully unit and have a great distraction carnifex (Steam Tank Commander with Steam Tank honour guard?), or you can have a bunch of quick, durable guys running with your general to make them take hits better. Given that one battle tactic involves killing units from the oppnent's Genetral's Regiment, that seems pretty good, too.

[Sarouan]

1 hour ago, Beliman said:

I'm with @Tonhel that this needs to be somehow part of the Core Rules.

The thing is, they clearly told they were working on "rule modules" for AoS 4th. This is exactly that. This is not a question of "core rules" or not. This is a question of selling their "season of war" on a yearly basis again, but differently presented.

That's why I ticked when I heard the word "module" in rules. That is their designers saying "we're totally not stopping the rule bloat, we're just doing it again from scratch with a nice new layout".

[Snarff]

I love the modular system tbh. If you don't like the rules, play without that module easily, and you can also easily remove core modules that you don't like. If a new module is really good, they can really easily add it to the core rules later on.

Shaking up the rules like season of war does is also not a bad thing.

[Beliman]

5 minutes ago, Neil Arthur Hotep said:

The timing of "During Deployment" is really impactful here. It especially makes Special Assignment a lot more interesting as a tool for dealing with skew lists

100%! Special Assignment makes some units really strong vs their prey target (and can combo with others Anti-X abilities), that forces people to be a bit more varied doing their lists to not get caught. At the same time, Priority Target can turn good ranged units in to stronger ones, and they can focus on removing anything in opponents General's detachment (aka, Special Assignement units). I can see a psychological game there (mouse and cat) and even deep strike abilities as part of a defensive tool, and that's really fun.

3 minutes ago, Sarouan said:

The thing is, they clearly told they were working on "rule modules" for AoS 4th. This is exactly that. This is not a question of "core rules" or not. This is a question of selling their "season of war" on a yearly basis again, but differently presented.

That's why I ticked when I heard the word "module" in rules. That is their designers saying "we're totally not stopping the rule bloat, we're just doing it again from scratch with a nice new layout".

I already know that's part of the module system, it was just me saying that I love this stuff. But I don't see any problem with the module system. My only issue with the rule bloat is how many layers of rules can be stacked on the same game (not system), and that's exactly what the module system should try to stop (they are replaced, not stacked one over the other).

Let's see how it goes.

[Tonhel]

38 minutes ago, Beliman said:

100%! Special Assignment makes some units really strong vs their prey target (and can combo with others Anti-X abilities), that forces people to be a bit more varied doing their lists to not get caught. At the same time, Priority Target can turn good ranged units in to stronger ones, and they can focus on removing anything in opponents General's detachment (aka, Special Assignement units). I can see a psychological game there (mouse and cat) and even deep strike abilities as part of a defensive tool, and that's really fun.

I already know that's part of the module system, it was just me saying that I love this stuff. But I don't see any problem with the module system. My only issue with the rule bloat is how many layers of rules can be stacked on the same game (not system), and that's exactly what the module system should try to stop (they are replaced, not stacked one over the other).

Let's see how it goes.

Exactly, it seems a great addition that gives flexibility to your army. My only problem is that it could be removed in a year when the new GHB module arrives. That's why this would have been perfect as part of the core rules.