Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

scarletsquig wrote:
Very interesting, only 9 factions. Still a lot more than some people were expecting.

Narrows things down to a very limited classic fantasy spectrum - Humans, Elves and Dwarfs vs. Orcs, Chaos and Undead.

It looks a bit like the armies that get remade are the ones that don't have a very strong, very tied-to-GW visual identity (i.e. are a bit more 'generic fantasy') and the ones that have strong GW-specific visuals are left out for the most part. But anyway, 9 Armies is a lot for a launch, even if they just make a couple of new things for each. That's the first DD that contains more than a small bit of concrete, useable information, and makes me cautiously optimistic again. Although of course only legacy Chorfs and no mention of Kislev makes you wonder what sort nonsense they were peddling in their earliest DDs

Well kislev was part of empire at one time. Could be part here too.

tneva82 wrote:
Well kislev was part of empire at one time. Could be part here too.

Was it - when was that?

This feels like such an arbitrary list of factions. Two Elf flavours, but no Skaven. Tomb Kings on a holiday trip up north, but no VC.

I get the specific time period they picked lets them get away with it, but more and more it seems like the project doesn't have a strong core idea of what they want it to be and is instead being stitched together as it goes.

 SgtEeveell wrote:

 kodos wrote:
So we can assume that the more modern Warhammer Fantasy kits are removed from AoS and go back to TOW
While the newer AoS kits are not meant to be used in TOW

Why wouldn't they just throw in extra bases and have the sets used for both? ISTR that there was quite a while when Demons came with both round & square bases for WFB and WH40K.

GW does not like cross platform for some reason - makes no sense to me....

Hooray for dwarfs!

Although all the dwarf kits I want are currently around in AOS, it will be nice to pick up some cannons and miners again for the bits alone, plus some heroes.

I’m just very thankful I never splurged on buying OOP fantasy models, save for the occasional metal hero (ones that had been finecastEd)

I hope they’ll still make models from those other factions available in smaller waves, even if it’s on a MTO basis. No big skaven faction may mean no island of blood remake, but maybe battle for skull pass is still on the table

 Mr Morden wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Well kislev was part of empire at one time. Could be part here too.

Was it - when was that?

That i can't tell when they last were but one part i'm 100% sure is 5th ed kislev had units in empire book.

Would help resource wise as less kits needed than stand alone book that needs enough units to be viable.

Not saying that's what happens(could just be later release) but optiyn is there.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 His Master's Voice wrote:
This feels like such an arbitrary list of factions. Two Elf flavours, but no Skaven. Tomb Kings on a holiday trip up north, but no VC.

I get the specific time period they picked lets them get away with it, but more and more it seems like the project doesn't have a strong core idea of what they want it to be and is instead being stitched together as it goes.

Well some trimming was inevitable. As is it's surprisingly many factions.

tneva82 wrote:

 Mr Morden wrote:

tneva82 wrote:
Well kislev was part of empire at one time. Could be part here too.

Was it - when was that?

That i can't tell when they last were but one part i'm 100% sure is 5th ed kislev had units in empire book.

Would help resource wise as less kits needed than stand alone book that needs enough units to be viable.

Not saying that's what happens(could just be later release) but optiyn is there.

Ah no - they are long term allies so they were included as units you could take representing the long standing alliance.

As far as I know since the time of Sigmar, the people that inhabited Kislev have been independant - although Simgar almost wiped out the Roppsmen in an campain of brutal vengance whilst under the influence of the Crown of Nagash.

"Dark Elves, Lizardmen, Chaos Dwarfs and Ogre Kingdoms are all based far from the Old World"

"Anyway here is the Cathay army"

Make it make sense!

interesting

so instead of the assumed civil war setting, vampire wars or great war against chaos, we have the border princess

it was the classic setting for campaigns were everyone was involved, setting of the early pc games and has some nostalgia
but that is boring compared to the others

for the armies, article reads as if only the side factions get free rules
depends if we see army books at start or an index like book for good and bad ones.

Tsagualsa wrote:

Good and evil? Riiiight...

I wonder if that will translate into sucky ally rules.

 His Master's Voice wrote:
This feels like such an arbitrary list of factions. Two Elf flavours, but no Skaven. Tomb Kings on a holiday trip up north, but no VC.

I get the specific time period they picked lets them get away with it, but more and more it seems like the project doesn't have a strong core idea of what they want it to be and is instead being stitched together as it goes.

I think to some extent the decision making has to do with IP preservation. Most of the excluded factions are well-entrenched into AoS now (Skaven, Ogres, Lizards, Vamps, Daemons, there are rumors of Chaos Dwarves coming soon, and Dark Elves are partially covered already via Daughters of Khaine, with "Umbraneth" presumably going to cover the remainder). Traditional fantasy knights, Tolkienesque Dwarves and Elves (in 2 flavors, and no Lumineth don't count here, they are actually a fairly large departure from traditional fantasy elf tropes), old fashioned orcs & gobbos, and egyptian undead are nowhere to be found in AoS and don't entirely fit the setting. Beastmen and Warriors of Chaos are well represented in AoS (though Beastmen have been a bit of bastard step-child, maybe they get fully ported to TOW and support for them in AoS gets cut? Doubtful), but I guess they needed some bad guys, unless they take a different tact with the Warriors of Chaos here and lean into Norsca and Kurgan aesthetics vs the heavy plate look of AoS/traditional warriors. Maybe TOW beastmen will be less cow and goat people and more like, I dunno, badgers and skunks or something. Empire also sits in a wierd spot as Freeguild or whatever seem to be adapting that aesthetic into AoS well, but the Empire is such a key part of the setting you can't really avoid it - also possible they go with a different aesthetic from what we're used to here, a bit less steampunk, a bit more traditional HRE, etc.

"Dark Elves, Lizardmen, Chaos Dwarfs and Ogre Kingdoms are all based far from the Old World"
"Anyway here is the Cathay army"
Make it make sense!

Considering theres zero mention of Cathay being an included army at this point?

 Geifer wrote:

Tsagualsa wrote:

Good and evil? Riiiight...

I wonder if that will translate into sucky ally rules.

Do you? I wonder if it will translate to an actual game!



Also, Tomb Kings are not 'Evil', even if one recognizes that Warhammer does not conform to Good/Evil splits easily, and Wood Elves are not 'Good'. It seems like a reduction in scope of the game comes along with a Flanderization of its themes and lore... anyway, now it's 'Narrative supplements', i wonder if that's just another name for something like e.g. the Campaign Sets of old, and means they want to get out of this setting with four or five printed products, in total?

Core Rules, Evil Index, Good Index, Evil Narritive Book, Good Narritive Book, general Background Book

or 1 supplement every 6 month with different armies in focus for a campaign and army books/index following every 12 months (Necromunda style release)

Tsagualsa wrote:

 Geifer wrote:

Tsagualsa wrote:

Good and evil? Riiiight...

I wonder if that will translate into sucky ally rules.

Do you? I wonder if it will translate to an actual game!



Also, Tomb Kings are not 'Evil', even if one recognizes that Warhammer does not conform to Good/Evil splits easily, and Wood Elves are not 'Good'. It seems like a reduction in scope of the game comes along with a Flanderization of its themes and lore... anyway, now it's 'Narrative supplements', i wonder if that's just another name for something like e.g. the Campaign Sets of old, and means they want to get out of this setting with four or five printed products, in total?

Actually, Warhammer sported a defined alignment system (well, scale) for a long time. Classically, warhammer wood elves did have Good alignment, and undead and orcs Evil.
The weirder aspect of this is stuffing humans and dwarfs under Good rather Neutral.

Now, personally I think alignment schemes are stupid, but if you want a return to the Old World and classic Warhammer things, alignment is a viable pick. I guess (it seems tone deaf in the current market, when even D&D is drifting away from hidebound alignment).


----
Anyway, after all the buildup about bretonnia, kislev and the empire and whatever (3 emperors, siege of prague, vampire wars) this deals with... nothing.
Just pokey battles in Neutral Land against rabble and Khemri. And, inexplicably, chaos warriors and elves anyway.
Exciting!

Three game designers diverged in a wood and the compromise was this, was it?

I am so confused as to what is evening going on anymore with this.

No mention of Kislev..... I fear that they have axed the plan of releasing them

 Gert wrote:
I am so confused as to what is evening going on anymore with this.

I'd be surprised if GW even knows anymore At this point it looks like they did at least one radical direction change for this without telling us, but whatever.

If its set before the Siege of Pragg, maybe they'll get released as part of that narrative supplement.

"Dark Elves, Lizardmen, Chaos Dwarfs and Ogre Kingdoms are all based far from the Old World"
"Anyway here is the Cathay army"
Make it make sense!

Considering theres zero mention of Cathay being an included army at this point?

https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/02/18/grand-cathay-is-mapped-for-the-first-time-in-warhammer-the-old-world/

"Cathay will also be coming to the tabletop in the upcoming Warhammer: The Old World."

Unless you are saying that they are stealth dropping Cathay and Kislev from The Old World, the official stance is they 'will' be in the Old World.

The reasoning that the other factions are too far away in this article still doesn't make any sense.

Sooooo what were those renders of Kislev then? This is a mess. Sad to see it go this way, but not shocked.

Warhammer Fest already said "in the far future"

why should GW add rules for them in the beginning with the model release being years away

I feel like this is utterly the wrong move, shows they have no idea what they're actually doing, and makes me have even less faith in the game.

I totally get that they can't release something so big that every army is there in full and they need to focus on something specific at the start, but what this article implies is that they aren't starting small and building up from there. They're just not bothering with half of the setting or armies at all.

This should have been the start - these armies initially - but others are still involved lore wise and will be built up to them at a later date. But no, that's not what's going on here. They're instead all just "not part of the narrative we’re telling with The Old World" with a lore excuse not to have them appear properly, they're just not going to be there beyond lip service "legacy rules". So this isn't just the starting point, this is just the game. That's it.

It's not a return to the WHFB setting with a Horus Heresy Style progression that'll develop over time and feature different parts of the lore as it should have been, it's confining things to a specific area of the setting, at a specific time, and a few specific races, not as a starting point but overall, so if you care about anything else? Too bad, they've decided the rest doesn't matter and won't be part of it.

It shows a lack of commitment, a lack of a long-term plan, and just a disregard for it overall.

 kodos wrote:
Warhammer Fest already said "in the far future"

why should GW add rules for them in the beginning with the model release being years away

They're adding 'legacy' rules for Chaos Dwarves and they don't even have/will have models.

 kodos wrote:
Warhammer Fest already said "in the far future"

why should GW add rules for them in the beginning with the model release being years away

Good thing they are adding rules for all those Chaos Dwarf models that exist right? I will get right on the website and buy them. Come on, don't defend the indefensible.

What the hell has been happening with development of this game? 4 years plus and all we really know is that some old models are coming back and a few new plastic units and character models from forgeworld. What happened to that Kislev army they showed in full ages ago? Or Cathay? How will they fit into the "narrative" they're trying to tell?

For the amount of time it's taken them I would have liked for at least 2 fully redone armies and a proper starter set

caladancid wrote:

 kodos wrote:
Warhammer Fest already said "in the far future"

why should GW add rules for them in the beginning with the model release being years away

Good thing they are adding rules for all those Chaos Dwarf models that exist right? I will get right on the website and buy them. Come on, don't defend the indefensible.

Just because they can't be purchased anymore doesn't mean that they stop "existing".

GW providing rules for OOP models is a good thing, yet you are trying to turn it into the opposite.

For people like you, GW are literally in a no-win situation, whatever they do.

Edit: typos

caladancid wrote:

 kodos wrote:
Warhammer Fest already said "in the far future"

why should GW add rules for them in the beginning with the model release being years away

Good thing they are adding rules for all those Chaos Dwarf models that exist right? I will get right on the website and buy them. Come on, don't defend the indefensible.

I don't think what they're doing is indefensible, just confused and not showing a solid plan. It is fine to either (1) re-release WHFB and just say we'll be releasing armies as they come, or (2) do a HH style limited setting dictated by the lore. But they're not really doing either with Old World. They seem hesitant to just say it's WHFB 2.0, but contradict themselves with the 'lore locked setting' aspect by releasing new armies which are not tied to the lore specific settting.

It just doesn't inspire confience, but hopefully they get their heads screwed on. Because I am very looking forward to Old World otherwise!

 Mentlegen324 wrote:
I feel like this is utterly the wrong move, shows they have no idea what they're actually doing, and makes me have even less faith in the game.

I totally get that they can't release something so big that every army is there in full and they need to focus on something specific at the start, but what this article implies is that they aren't starting small and building up from there. They're just not bothering with half of the setting or armies at all.

This should have been the start - these armies initially - but others are still involved lore wise and will be built up to them at a later date. But no, that's not what's going on here. They're instead all just "not part of the narrative we’re telling with The Old World" with a lore excuse not to have them appear properly, they're just not going to be there beyond lip service "legacy rules". So this isn't just the starting point, this is just the game. That's it.

It's not a return to the WHFB setting with a Horus Heresy Style progression that'll develop over time and feature different parts of the lore as it should have been, it's confining things to a specific area of the setting, at a specific time, and a few specific races, not as a starting point but overall, so if you care about anything else? Too bad, they've decided the rest doesn't matter and won't be part of it.

It shows a lack of commitment, a lack of a long-term plan, and just a disregard for it overall.

I think you're correct, but money talks. If it becomes successful - they will expand it. If not...

For me I'm not onboard until I have lots more details.

I read this as the Old World will be Empire Centric.

One of the main gripes with whfb campaigns was that they always had to make up excuses for all 16 factions to be in some place so they could fight.

I guess 9 factions can work. They'll release skaven and lizardmen later as own campaign series no doubt.

IF they mean to have the game running for a long time.

To be honest I, who is a sceptic that theyll even release a game, is now more optimistic. At least they are less ambitious in scale.