The Rumour Thread

[Sonnenspeer]

So the article says at the end we will have a balance update this month. Didn't expected that. 👀

[Ejecutor]

17 minutes ago, PraetorDragoon said:

The more annoying thing is that Regiments of Renown are also locked behind the battletome. You know, those things that are specifically made to replace allies and can be taken only with other factions. 

No way.

[Hollow]

When it comes to criticism of GW I rarely go "all out" as I view things through two different lenses, wearing two different hats. The hat of a customer, gamer and fan going on nearly 30 years and that of a capitalist, bean-counting investor that admires GW as a company and its successes. There are times when I come up against frustrations that affect me in the former sense. Price, content, release strategies, etc. but those frustrations are usually tempered when I put my investor cap on and can at least appreciate the justifiable business/financial logic in why something is approached in the way that it is. 

I understand that the Battletome, Codex and pay-for-rules access have been a fundamental aspect of GW's business practice for many years. It made sense. However, this is one of the few instances where there is an increasing overlap in frustrations as both a customer and investor. As Tonhel mentioned earlier, in an ever-increasing digital age, the idea that you need to buy the product, to get a code, to then access the digital content is utterly regressive. 

I (as I am sure many others have) have spent a lot of time over the last few weeks putting together all kinds of weird and wacky "What if" lists on the app. Which have in turn, directly inspired me to invest in two new army projects. (Hedonites of Slannesh & Maggotkin of Nurgle) 

Allowing for unfettered access to rules is a gateway that will lead to MORE money, but it is being artificially kept shut because of a reluctance to let go of a system that is currently making SOME money. 

It just stinks of a regressive approach to try and counter-piracy and a small-minded, short-sighted protectionist policy to try and hold onto profits from publications. 

(As a side, I am also not a fan of just how much waste is being generated by the endless pumping out of books, cards, hand-books etc that are updated just a few weeks later) GW publications should match the quality of their models. The card stock they are using for decks is the cheapest possible. It diminishes the brand and the perception of quality. I WANT to buy quality publications from GW. I want art and stories and lore. 

I have been holding out, hoping that there would be a change of approach regarding publications. Unfortunately, it seems like rather than embracing progression in this area, they are embracing regression and it stinks. 

Edited 7 hours ago by Hollow

[MitGas]

5 minutes ago, Hollow said:

When it comes to criticism of GW I rarely go "all out" as I view things through two different lenses, wearing two different hats. The hat of a customer, gamer and fan going on nearly 30 years and that of a capitalist, bean-counting investor that admires GW as a company and its successes. There are times when I come up against frustrations that affect me in the former sense. Price, content, release strategies, etc. but those frustrations are usually tempered when I put my investor cap on and can at least appreciate the justifiable business/financial logic in why something is approached in the way that it is. 

I understand that the Battletome, Codex and pay-for-rules access have been a fundamental aspect of GW's business practice for many years. It made sense. However, this is one of the few instances where there is an increasing overlap in frustrations as both a customer and investor. As Tonhel mentioned earlier, in an ever-increasing digital age, the idea that you need to buy the product, to get a code, to then access the digital content is utterly regressive. 

I (as I am sure many others have) have spent a lot of time over the last few weeks putting together all kinds of weird and wacky "What if" lists on the app. Which have in turn, directly inspired me to invest in two new army projects. (Hedonites of Slannesh & Maggotkin of Nurgle) 

Allowing for unfettered access to rules is a gateway that will lead to MORE money, but it is being artificially kept shut because of a reluctance to let go of a system that is currently making SOME money. 

It just stinks of a regressive approach to try and counter-piracy and a small-minded, short-sighted protectionist policy to try and hold onto profits from publications. 

(As a side, I am also not a fan of just how much waste is being generated by the endless pumping out of books, cards, hand-books etc that are updated just a few weeks later) GW publications should match the quality of their models. The card stock they are using for decks is the cheapest possible. It diminishes the brand and the perception of quality. I WANT to buy quality publications from GW. I want art and stories and lore. 

I have been holding out, hoping that there would be a change of approach regarding publications. Unfortunately, it seems like rather than embracing progression in this area, they are embracing regression and it stinks. 

The only thing GW does well are minis and some of the lore, mostly the old stuff. The rules are absolutely meh and the way people are forced to buy them again and again is subpar - buying extras like warscroll cards is bordering on insane. If GW didn‘t have a couple of talented employees/creatives, the whole company would be bankrupt in a couple of years cause those smart finance guys aren‘t doing jacksheet for its success. It lives solely thanks to its heritage and superior creative work. 

[Matrindur]

39 minutes ago, PraetorDragoon said:

The more annoying thing is that Regiments of Renown are also locked behind the battletome. You know, those things that are specifically made to replace allies and can be taken only with other factions. 

I haven't looked into RoR yet but can they only be taken by other factions? Because the Skaven points document says the two RoR can be taken by the four god aligned armies and Skaven armies. Or is that a mistake and they meant S2D?

[PraetorDragoon]

6 minutes ago, Matrindur said:

I haven't looked into RoR yet but can they only be taken by other factions? Because the Skaven points document says the two RoR can be taken by the four god aligned armies and Skaven armies. Or is that a mistake and they meant S2D?

Odd. You are correct, the document does list them to being taken in Skaven. I would assume that is a mistake otherwise things can get quite weird. 

[RetconnedLegion]

1 hour ago, Ejecutor said:

There are people that sell the codes second hand...

Which illustrates that GW are costing themselves money. There’s a market for just the digital content on the app. So they could either sell it for a reduced price, or provide it for free. Those of us who want the background will still buy the books, and those who pirate it were always going to anyway.

[Neverchosen]

30 minutes ago, RetconnedLegion said:

Which illustrates that GW are costing themselves money. There’s a market for just the digital content on the app. So they could either sell it for a reduced price, or provide it for free. Those of us who want the background will still buy the books, and those who pirate it were always going to anyway.

Vampirates confirmed?

[Ejecutor]

1 hour ago, Hollow said:

When it comes to criticism of GW I rarely go "all out" as I view things through two different lenses, wearing two different hats. The hat of a customer, gamer and fan going on nearly 30 years and that of a capitalist, bean-counting investor that admires GW as a company and its successes. There are times when I come up against frustrations that affect me in the former sense. Price, content, release strategies, etc. but those frustrations are usually tempered when I put my investor cap on and can at least appreciate the justifiable business/financial logic in why something is approached in the way that it is. 

I understand that the Battletome, Codex and pay-for-rules access have been a fundamental aspect of GW's business practice for many years. It made sense. However, this is one of the few instances where there is an increasing overlap in frustrations as both a customer and investor. As Tonhel mentioned earlier, in an ever-increasing digital age, the idea that you need to buy the product, to get a code, to then access the digital content is utterly regressive. 

I (as I am sure many others have) have spent a lot of time over the last few weeks putting together all kinds of weird and wacky "What if" lists on the app. Which have in turn, directly inspired me to invest in two new army projects. (Hedonites of Slannesh & Maggotkin of Nurgle) 

Allowing for unfettered access to rules is a gateway that will lead to MORE money, but it is being artificially kept shut because of a reluctance to let go of a system that is currently making SOME money. 

It just stinks of a regressive approach to try and counter-piracy and a small-minded, short-sighted protectionist policy to try and hold onto profits from publications. 

(As a side, I am also not a fan of just how much waste is being generated by the endless pumping out of books, cards, hand-books etc that are updated just a few weeks later) GW publications should match the quality of their models. The card stock they are using for decks is the cheapest possible. It diminishes the brand and the perception of quality. I WANT to buy quality publications from GW. I want art and stories and lore. 

I have been holding out, hoping that there would be a change of approach regarding publications. Unfortunately, it seems like rather than embracing progression in this area, they are embracing regression and it stinks. 

I think the main reason for this is trying to "save" Warhammer +. It would be interesting to see how the W+ subscribers turn if the apps were completely free.

[Vaellas]

2 minutes ago, Ejecutor said:

I think the main reason for this is trying to "save" Warhammer +. It would be interesting to see how the W+ subscribers turn if the apps were completely free.

I think with this current model they are doing if they really wanted people to get Warhammer plus they should have allowed for all the rules to be free with a sub of Warhammer +. We know they are not going to actually allow them for free anymore, but at least this would have allowed a way for people to still view those rules and GW get the money they wanted.

[Ejecutor]

On the topic of Othar the Half-King having a little NH. I just discovered that Zandtos also has one:





It could be just something shared across those Death factions closer to Nagash.

[Ejecutor]

10 minutes ago, Vaellas said:

I think with this current model they are doing if they really wanted people to get Warhammer plus they should have allowed for all the rules to be free with a sub of Warhammer +. We know they are not going to actually allow them for free anymore, but at least this would have allowed a way for people to still view those rules and GW get the money they wanted.

But that would settle a precedent they clearly don't want to settle.

[EthanolMuffins]

1 hour ago, Ejecutor said:

But that would settle a precedent they clearly don't want to settle.

It would be the smarter move tho, assuming for example an SCE player subscribes for rules access at the start of the edition

 

That is approximately $252 over the course of the edition for the sole availability for rules, and if you make the battletomes focused on lore and are and charge $40-50 for them that would encourage more people to buy them as they become disconnected from the feeling that you need to own the army and could likely push people to start new armies

 

It seems a much better business decision to go that route but GW has their heels dug in and it would not shock me to see it cost them in the next year or two

[AquaRegis]

3 hours ago, MitGas said:

The only thing GW does well are minis and some of the lore, mostly the old stuff. The rules are absolutely meh and the way people are forced to buy them again and again is subpar - buying extras like warscroll cards is bordering on insane. If GW didn‘t have a couple of talented employees/creatives, the whole company would be bankrupt in a couple of years cause those smart finance guys aren‘t doing jacksheet for its success. It lives solely thanks to its heritage and superior creative work. 

100%. 

I'm not particularly enthusiastic about 4th edition AOS's rules and have dropped 10th Ed 40k for the same reason. I'm willing to give it a chance to see how it develops going forward with the next few battletomes, and where the narratives go, but I'm slowly just moving back to the Old World. 

The IP is what's holding GW together (mostly 40k). The attitude towards 10th edition from the majority of players, including big 40k YouTube channels is that it's not a particularly good edition and has a lot of poorly implemented features (set squad sizes and free equipment). Despite that, it's still by far the most popular game system and 40k tournaments frequently sell out quickly.

 

[drumpouch]

2 hours ago, Ejecutor said:

On the topic of Othar the Half-King having a little NH. I just discovered that Zandtos also has one:





It could be just something shared across those Death factions closer to Nagash.

So are we sure this is the Half King model? 

[Neil Arthur Hotep]

26 minutes ago, drumpouch said:

So are we sure this is the Half King model? 

He's got no legs and a crown. That's a Half-King in my book.

[Ejecutor]

30 minutes ago, drumpouch said:

So are we sure this is the Half King model? 

It looks like, but we are not sure.

[NotBeastmanBob]

32 minutes ago, Ejecutor said:

It looks like, but we are not sure.

So we have a half king, a hollow king

 

What's next? 😂

[Snorri Nelriksson]

21 minutes ago, NotBeastmanBob said:

So we have a half king, a hollow king

 

What's next? 😂

"We have already a fake king ohohoh"(Kurdoss)

[EthanolMuffins]

42 minutes ago, NotBeastmanBob said:

So we have a half king, a hollow king

 

What's next? 😂

A hungry king, gimme that Ogor refresh

[CommissarRotke]

21 hours ago, TechnoVampire said:

Am I right in thinking that once the battletome’s are released there will be no free GW source of accessing warscrolls? If so that is mad. 
 

 

I think the faction packs are what's intended to be free, but who knows if/when they'll get taken down

[cyrus]

1 hour ago, drumpouch said:

So are we sure this is the Half King model? 

According to @dmorley21has been leaked really early and it should be out in march / death release on road map . 
 

It seems a potato picture of a book / battletome 

[Ejecutor]

12 minutes ago, CommissarRotke said:

I think the faction packs are what's intended to be free, but who knows if/when they'll get taken down

Once the BT is launched. I didn't check, but the Skaven one is already removed or will be pretty soon.

Edited 1 hour ago by Ejecutor

[Beliman]

2 hours ago, AquaRegis said:

I'm not particularly enthusiastic about 4th edition AOS's rules

My perspective is close enough but I disagree with this part. I think that AoS 4th has the best core rules for an AoS edition.

It still has some issues, of course, like any other GW game, but it is vastly improved compared to older editions. I can't believe that we could play this game without a cavalry keyword or basic weapons that do damage to charging units, how's that possible in a Wargame?

Don't get me wrong, there are a lot of things that are not in line with what I like, but that's another thing to talk about.

[CommissarRotke]

2 minutes ago, Ejecutor said:

Once the BT is launched. I didn't check, but the Skaven one is already removed or will be pretty soon.

welp this is SUPER scummy... the faction pack gets replaced by "battle profiles." If you aren't going to change the damn rules much when printing a full BT why even risk this level of badwill

https://www.warhammer-community.com/warhammer-age-of-sigmar-downloads/