Warhammer - The Old World news and rumors. Pre orders. p.280.

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.

**Gallahad**

I think limiting the initial scope of their 4yr old vaporware is a reasonable move. The whole thing might just be an exercise to see how long they can string you guys along for.

I had hoped they would rerelease Island of Blood which remains one of the most visually stunning starter boxes they have ever produced. But with no Skaven looks like that won't be the case.

**Mentlegen324**

Gallahad wrote:
I think limiting the initial scope of their 4yr old vaporware is a reasonable move. The whole thing might just be an exercise to see how long they can string you guys along for.

I had hoped they would rerelease Island of Blood which remains one of the most visually stunning starter boxes they have ever produced. But with no Skaven looks like that won't be the case.

The problem is this doesn't appear to be just the initial scope. It outright says that even as the narrative develops, the other stuff isn't part of what the project covers.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Grinshanks wrote:
"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!

Mentlegen324 wrote:

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 told you so". I mean, I think you're going too far in the wrong direction, unless they completely changed all their plans they teased from the past couple years, it seems that its a game designed to grow and evolve over time, given the promises of Kislev and Cathay in the future, but from the beginning theres been quite a few of us saying (and being shouted down by naysayers) that the community should curb its expectations and that it wasn't a coincidence that the game is called "The Old World" and basically the first actual thing they showed us (after the logo) was a map of the literal continent of The Old World and not much else. I expect some of those other factions to make a comeback, along with new ones, but it seems clear that they regard factions like the Ogres and Lizardmen to now be the provenance of Age of Sigmar and don't feel obligated to heavily explore them more in the-world-that-was. Doesn't mean they won't ever get attention, but safe to say they are lower in priority and they have a lot more interest in fleshing out other aspects of the setting that aren't redundant to their current flagship fantasy IP.

"The Old World" is a term they've used to refer to the WHFB setting as whole, not just that specific continent, and the maps and articles talking about Cathay and Kislev - who are outside of that part of the map - further implied it wasn't just that.

Now it is, with no hint at all about any of that other stuff, and them outright saying things outside of these armies aren't part of the narrative even as it progresses.

**Sacredroach**

I literally only have three armies left for WHFB

Skaven
Lizardmen
Chaos Dwarfs

So I suppose I'm not the target audience for The Old World...

**Tsagualsa**

chaos0xomega wrote:
Excellent stuff

Great post that sums up my misgivings about the thing perfectly - their communication is a jumbled mess, and as a result all sorts of people have varying levels of information and the community in general is confused and angry. Probably angrier than it should be, but that is on GW - it seems like we have been marketed three totally different approaches to the Old World under that label already, and there are no signs of the game being released anytime soon. Doing a two-tiered list of armies, where one half of the existing things get new models and books and the rest gets a warm handshake and a get-you-by pdf is bound to rile people up, especially when done with a paper-thin excuse of 'muh narrative' and no rhyme or reason. 'Narrative' for GW, outside of Forgeworld books, usually means little value for definitely not-little money...

This project lacks focus, a plan and above all, coherent and unambiguous communications.

**Arcanis161**

Dang, they just decided to ditch Cathay and Kislev then? They had an article a couple of years ago indicating they'd be playable factions, but I guess they just decided to drop them like a bad idea.

Articles for reference:
Kislev: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2020/03/23/the-old-world-ice-guard-of-kislevgw-homepage-post-4fw-homepage-post-2/
Cathay (granted, no indication of them becoming a playable factions specifically): https://www.warhammer-community.com/2022/02/18/grand-cathay-is-mapped-for-the-first-time-in-warhammer-the-old-world/

Playable factions (notice no Kislev or Cathay): https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/05/23/old-world-development-diary-the-main-factions-revealed/

**caladancid**

Londinium wrote:
Everyone whinging over Kislev (and to a lesser extent Cathay) - it's clear that today's article just dealt with the existing 8e armies. I would expect to see Kislev pop up in year 2 or 3 of the game if it's successful under a new supplement. Hell I wouldn't even be surprised if they're in the launch books and just haven't been mentioned in this article because they're not an 8e army and GW want to market them separately.

GW have already said Kislev is coming, we've had previews of them and Creative Assembly said that GW have designed them - thus one of the reasons why they ended up in TWW3.

Read between the lines, it's not tough.

You aren’t just reading between the lines, you are just making up what you wish was happening. The articles that are linked and screenshotted for you to look at, if you want to, say Kislev is a faction. Not maybe a faction. Not coming later if the game sells well. It was the FIRST faction previewed.

**Gert**

With regard to Kislev and Cathay, it doesn't technically say they aren't part of it. The armies that aren't getting featured are specifically called out as legacy WHFB armies, which Kislev and Cathay were not.
Irritating technicality is hardly a new thing for GW.

It is still objectively true that any and all comms for this game are a huge mess, however. Not disagreeing there.

**Tittliewinks22**

Glad Conquest is getting better each release, ToW looks doa

**Tsagualsa**

Gert wrote:
With regard to Kislev and Cathay, it doesn't technically say they aren't part of it. The armies that aren't getting featured are specifically called out as legacy WHFB armies, which Kislev and Cathay were not.
Irritating technicality is hardly a new thing for GW.

It is still objectively true that any and all comms for this game are a huge mess, however. Not disagreeing there.

Some of their decisions only make sense when you assume some sort of underlying motive - for example the exlcusion of e.g. Chaos Demons makes no sense thematically. Imho there are some equally likely possibilities: either they want to focus on the races that need their IP strengthened and tied to GW, or they want to focus on stuff that is only useful in TOW, to have an accurate gauge of the economic prospects of that game (i.e. no sales 'hidden' by stuff that is multi-purpose in AoS and 40k as well, like Demons). It might be something like a very hard 'succeed or die' deadline looming over the project due to time and cost overshoot, who knows.

**Gert**

Pretty sure the article says that entire Daemon armies aren't in the game because Chaos is in a period of low power prior to the ascension of the next Everchosen. So while Daemons are a thing, they're just small summoned bands or ascended mortals rather than entire Legions breaching the veil between the Realm of Chaos and the mortal world.

I don't know WHFB's background well enough to say if this is true but it fits with how I know 40k Daemons work with regards to them only manifesting en masse when a world is truly screwed.

**James12345**

The decision to just bring back the old factions, but not all of them, is baffling to me. Especially when many of the abandoned ones have full, updated model lines as part of age of sigmar that could easily be transferred over. I don't buy the "narrative" excuse either, as why would tomb kings and high elves be involved when skaven isn't? Cathay and kislev are MIA too, despite being the focus of early marketing material.

I think something has gone very wrong in development. I think it was meant to release 1 to 2 years after the initial announcement, with all new models, but for some reason they decided to completely change direction and that's why it's been 5 and we still have pretty much no info.

**Voss**

I think it was meant to release 1 to 2 years after the initial announcement

It definitely was not. The initial announcement actively mentioned 3 years, minimum (and stressed minimum). And that was best case before COVID, Brexit and shipping nonsense.

Yes, things have gone wrong (imo) and they changed direction, but a long development time was announced and expected. The only thing they had in place at the time of announcement was the logo and square bases.

**Ignispacium**

I'm (pleasantly) surprised by the inclusion of Chaos Dwarves. I wonder if it's just a revisit of the Legion of Azgorh list?

Regarding some armies getting a legacy pdf vs full support, it may just be that there was just simply not enough time to playtest/finish them to the same extent. If there's a hard deadline for the release of TOW, then it may be a case of shipping whatever is ready at the time.

**Gert**

It was never 1 to 2 years post announcement, that much is true.

**Vorian**

James12345 wrote:
The decision to just bring back the old factions, but not all of them, is baffling to me. Especially when many of the abandoned ones have full, updated model lines as part of age of sigmar that could easily be transferred over.

I would imagine manufacturing capacity dictates that not everything that could be brought back is being brought back.

**James12345**

Vorian wrote:
James12345 wrote:
The decision to just bring back the old factions, but not all of them, is baffling to me. Especially when many of the abandoned ones have full, updated model lines as part of age of sigmar that could easily be transferred over.

I would imagine manufacturing capacity dictates that not everything that could be brought back is being brought back.

But all of the stuff is already back as part of age of sigmar! So why aren't they including them in this too?

**MaxT**

Probably an object lesson in why you don’t announce stuff so far ahead - when things inevitably change during development peeps cry foul

**Gert**

James12345 wrote:
But all of the stuff is already back as part of age of sigmar! So why aren't they including them in this too?

Some, not all. Very few armies are exactly as they were when AoS started with those that had large portions of finecast or metal minis being the most gutted.

**James12345**

Gert wrote:
James12345 wrote:
But all of the stuff is already back as part of age of sigmar! So why aren't they including them in this too?

Some, not all. Very few armies are exactly as they were when AoS started with those that had large portions of finecast or metal minis being the most gutted.

I suspect many of the finecast minis won't be returning anyway, but that could be a problem. You could definitely create a more than workable army from what is available at the moment though.

**Overread**

MaxT wrote:
Probably an object lesson in why you don’t announce stuff so far ahead - when things inevitably change during development peeps cry foul

Eh some have been crying foul the entire time since the first announcement

Some just won't be pleased or read so far into the scant marketing that they come out the otherside with expectations wildly different from what's been shown.

In the end I'd wager MANY more are happy to see the armies returning that GW is advertising and are excited to get the rank and file game back along with a slew of classic models; many of which were very good in their time.

**Londinium**

caladancid wrote:
Londinium wrote:
Everyone whinging over Kislev (and to a lesser extent Cathay) - it's clear that today's article just dealt with the existing 8e armies. I would expect to see Kislev pop up in year 2 or 3 of the game if it's successful under a new supplement. Hell I wouldn't even be surprised if they're in the launch books and just haven't been mentioned in this article because they're not an 8e army and GW want to market them separately.

GW have already said Kislev is coming, we've had previews of them and Creative Assembly said that GW have designed them - thus one of the reasons why they ended up in TWW3.

Read between the lines, it's not tough.

You aren’t just reading between the lines, you are just making up what you wish was happening. The articles that are linked and screenshotted for you to look at, if you want to, say Kislev is a faction. Not maybe a faction. Not coming later if the game sells well. It was the FIRST faction previewed.

There's literally been Kislev concept art promoted, of new units and not just recycled. Either GW have utterly cocked up their production, which would be rare (Cursed City being one of the few examples in recent years) and considering these things have 2-3 years lead times, I doubt they would have shown Kislev concept art unless they were confident that Kislev was locked into the game. Or Kislev will be coming at some point, perhaps from the start and hasn't been mentioned because it wasn't an 8e army or perhaps early in the games lifespan. It'd be utterly stupid to launch a game set 20 years before the Siege of Praag, when an invasion of Kislev is the culmination of the historical era, when you've previewed Kislev concept art, when you've said Kislev will be in the game....then not release Kislev.

Having Kislev and other factions coming after an initial launch is actually very savvy sales by GW as the initial launch will sell regardless of new factions. Then once the initial hype drops you launch a new faction, being fleshed out properly for the first time to whip it back up.

**Grot 6**

The more I hear about this "Old World" nonsense, the less I like.

That is why Warhammer Fantasy Battles and Mordhiem skirmish is making a resurgence in my neck of the woods. The news about "The Old World" was THE best sales pitch to me to get back into fantasy and get the books and armies I couldn't get the first time around.

Then there's Mordhiem...

I'm back into Mordhiem again.

That "Old World" stuff looks to me like it was some releases that were supposed to come out when that AOS nonsense kicked off. Looks to me like someone is listening to the rumblings in the warp and reaching out as either a cash grab, or a test base to see if Fantasy kicks up again.

**Billicus**

I've gone over to Kings of War for my rank and file fantasy fix and never looked back really. I'm mostly hoping Old World will be an opportunity to pick up models I missed the first time around, zero interest from a gameplay perspective.

**Tsagualsa**

MaxT wrote:
Probably an object lesson in why you don’t announce stuff so far ahead - when things inevitably change during development peeps cry foul

Just a tidbit to put in perspective how far out they announced stuff: the Map of the Old World they showed in one of the earliest diaries/announcements was the first in-house piece of work for which Louise Sugden was the main creator - she has since had her career of seven years at SDS ('Forgeworld') and GW, was packaging designer, illustrator, presenter for Warhammer TV and more, and now has her own independent company.

**James12345**

Tsagualsa wrote:
MaxT wrote:
Probably an object lesson in why you don’t announce stuff so far ahead - when things inevitably change during development peeps cry foul

Just a tidbit to put in perspective how far out they announced stuff: the Map of the Old World they showed in one of the earliest diaries/announcements was the first in-house piece of work for which Louise Sugden was the main creator - she has since had her career of seven years at SDS ('Forgeworld') and GW, was packaging designer, illustrator, presenter for Warhammer TV and more, and now has her own independent company.

I wonder if she or Chris peach will do a video about its development. Chris seems to be doing a lot of "exposing gw" type videos, would be interesting to get an insider view on it

**Lord Damocles**

Ignispacium wrote:
...it may just be that there was just simply not enough time to playtest/finish them to the same extent...

Oh you sweet summer child...

**Tyel**

Ignispacium wrote:
Regarding some armies getting a legacy pdf vs full support, it may just be that there was just simply not enough time to playtest/finish them to the same extent. If there's a hard deadline for the release of TOW, then it may be a case of shipping whatever is ready at the time.

But there's no deadline?
Everyone will get "Ravening Hordes 2.0". Then the 9 factions seem set to get support - new models, army books, campaign supplements etc. Maybe things like Kislev and Cathay will show up - but so long as GW are working their way through this supposed roadmap, there will be nothing for Skaven, Lizardmen, DE etc.

This is presumably not something that will all come out together with a bang - but be rolled out over years.

If they just said "we hope for ToW to come out late this year/2024, and for the first few years we'll be looking at these 9 factions (and maybe some new ones,

)" it would be fine. But instead it seems they are going "oh those other factions just aren't in this game. Cos we say so."

**Gert**

James12345 wrote:
I wonder if she or Chris peach will do a video about its development. Chris seems to be doing a lot of "exposing gw" type videos, would be interesting to get an insider view on it

There is a difference between Chris Peach talking about his time as a retail monkey or why he decided to leave GW and "exposing" stuff. Talking about the development of a game system that is in active development isn't going to happen because NDAs are a very enforceable thing.

**Tsagualsa**

Tyel wrote:

If they just said "we hope for ToW to come out late this year/2024, and for the first few years we'll be looking at these 9 factions (and maybe some new ones, )" it would be fine. But instead it seems they are going "oh those other factions just aren't in this game. Cos we say so."

The thing that is worrying about that is not so much the arbitrary nature of this decision, but the closedness of it. Usually, you don't get hard 'no's from GW concerning plans for the future - their usual marketing-talk around such issues is normally in the vein of 'there are no concrete plans to do that yet' or 'we'll have to decide that when we get around to doing these' or any conceivable iteration thereof. All their talk of 'This is not part of the narrative that we want to tell' etc. points to this being an effort that is somewhat limited, and will just end when the narrative is finished. And that is a factor that could conceivably prevent many people from investing time and money into this setting and system.

**Mentlegen324**

Londinium wrote:
caladancid wrote:
Londinium wrote:
Everyone whinging over Kislev (and to a lesser extent Cathay) - it's clear that today's article just dealt with the existing 8e armies. I would expect to see Kislev pop up in year 2 or 3 of the game if it's successful under a new supplement. Hell I wouldn't even be surprised if they're in the launch books and just haven't been mentioned in this article because they're not an 8e army and GW want to market them separately.

GW have already said Kislev is coming, we've had previews of them and Creative Assembly said that GW have designed them - thus one of the reasons why they ended up in TWW3.

Read between the lines, it's not tough.

You aren’t just reading between the lines, you are just making up what you wish was happening. The articles that are linked and screenshotted for you to look at, if you want to, say Kislev is a faction. Not maybe a faction. Not coming later if the game sells well. It was the FIRST faction previewed.

There's literally been Kislev concept art promoted, of new units and not just recycled. Either GW have utterly cocked up their production, which would be rare (Cursed City being one of the few examples in recent years) and considering these things have 2-3 years lead times, I doubt they would have shown Kislev concept art unless they were confident that Kislev was locked into the game. Or Kislev will be coming at some point, perhaps from the start and hasn't been mentioned because it wasn't an 8e army or perhaps early in the games lifespan. It'd be utterly stupid to launch a game set 20 years before the Siege of Praag, when an invasion of Kislev is the culmination of the historical era, when you've previewed Kislev concept art, when you've said Kislev will be in the game....then not release Kislev.

Having Kislev and other factions coming after an initial launch is actually very savvy sales by GW as the initial launch will sell regardless of new factions. Then once the initial hype drops you launch a new faction, being fleshed out properly for the first time to whip it back up.

We saw Kislev and Cathay earlier on, even maps for them, only to now have them say its centered on the Old World part of the map that those two aren't part of, with absolutely no indication of expanding to other areas/armies at a later time. What this article talks about isn't just for the initial launch of the game, it's talking about what the game itself consists of - and nowhere does it hint at expanding it beyond that later.

It says that these 9 armies are the core of the game itself, even with additional books later on and it says that other armies are not part of the narrative they're telling. Not that something like Skaven and Lizardmen are coming later, they're just not part of what the project covers beyond the lip service rules they're getting.