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.

 Darnok wrote:

Tsagualsa wrote:

 Darnok wrote:
Keep in mind they have stated - in no uncertain terms - that every unit from 8th edition will get rules for TOW. Some things might get the "index treatment", and I guess this will include the Luminark/Hurricanum. They will still be playable though.

Have they now? Please take no offence, but i don't remember that specific wording - although it's easily possible they did say so and i just forgot among all the stuff. If you could provide a citation or source i'd greatly appreciate it!

It is not impossible I might be reading too much into things.

But...

In the "The Main Factions Revealed" article on May 23rd, after the confirmation of PDF rules for the "minor" factions they also stated: "We don’t plan to publish rules for Warhammer Age of Sigmar miniatures, except for those units that were part of the game and setting during the final edition of Warhammer Fantasy Battles." If this applies to everything from the main factions as well... good question actually. I think it can be read both ways, and I have to paddle back on my "in no uncertain terms" statement.

Thanks. At the time, i read that as 'some models currently parts of AOS will receive rules for TOW', but not as 'everything in 8th will get TOW rules', but i see how it could be read that way. I guess we'll have to wait until more information becomes available.

Mozzamanx wrote:
On the other hand the Steam Tanks are a few hundred years old and if anything, there should be more of them because they are in decline in WFB.

So they'll be a 0-12 choice instead of 0-8?

New Article on the rules: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2023/07/24/old-world-development-diary-the-more-things-change-the-more-they-stay-the-same/?utm_source=CUSTOMERS&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=GW_24th_July_Wildercorpse_ENG_&utm_content=&utm_term=

That they've gone back to play old versions of the game when working out the rules for this is a good sign, at least.

"this bit worked and was popular so thats out, and whats this about paying points for weapon upgrades, stuff that, thats complicated"

hopefully followed by the sound of a gunshot as sensible people take over

With this in mind, we set about playing lots of games.**
** It’s a tough job, but someone’s gotta do it…

Too tough for the 40k devs apparently.

But thats kinda old news? We already knew they were cribbing from previous editions of the game to develop the rules.

Personally, to me the article uses a lot of words to not really tell us much in concrete terms. After the whole "10th edition 40k will be less lethal" marketing misfire, I am not inclined to trust empty marketing promises from WarCom without concrete explanations of how the rules actually work.

Who would have thought that I'd already be bored of the game before it was anywhere close to release?

Attacking with the entire front rank... sure hope they put a LOT of thought into this mechanic.

The section on magic might be the most interesting part of the article.

Interesting that they showed off a lot of older terrain plastic pieces in the photos - return of the mighty fortress, hills, etc?

 Arbitrator wrote:

With this in mind, we set about playing lots of games.**
** It’s a tough job, but someone’s gotta do it…

Too tough for the 40k devs apparently.

setting "Ooof" to 11

Sounds like they've gone right back to 3rd edition combat resolution. If I remember it's, where instead of fleeing, the loser gets pushed back and the victor get free hacks against the loser

Vague words about stuff tell us very very little

Yeah. I’d have thought we’d be getting something more tangible by now. I like the hints about 3rd edition. I think that’s still my favourite version, crusty grognard that I am.

 zedmeister wrote:
Interesting that they showed off a lot of older terrain plastic pieces in the photos - return of the mighty fortress, hills, etc?

I can see more recent scenery returning for a time: the fortified manor house, the wizards tower that looked excellent except for the skulls, that sort of thing.

Rihgu wrote:Attacking with the entire front rank... sure hope they put a LOT of thought into this mechanic.

The moment they decided that you can use whatever base sizes you like it was clear that anything but this solution would lead to endless arguments about modelling for advantage

Grail Seeker wrote:The section on magic might be the most interesting part of the article.

If you read between the lines it means AOS/40k-style 'magic' where the spells are just preset abilities that you can use. No dice pools and no hands of cards means that the system will probably be pretty simple, if there's a 'system' at all - at worst it's preset spells per character, with most of them limited in range and enemy wizards having an x+ 'counter' roll. Their statement that game-deciding spells will be 'rare' probably means the same. If we're lucky, there'll at least be a list of spells to roll/pick from, if we're out of luck it's twenty variations of the 'D6 mortal wounds without calling it that' fireball.

 Undead_Love-Machine wrote:

 zedmeister wrote:
Interesting that they showed off a lot of older terrain plastic pieces in the photos - return of the mighty fortress, hills, etc?

I can see more recent scenery returning for a time: the fortified manor house, the wizards tower that looked excellent except for the skulls, that sort of thing.

Yeah, those two towers are excellent for use in Frostgrave, after some modifications of course...

Tsagualsa wrote:

Grail Seeker wrote:The section on magic might be the most interesting part of the article.

If you read between the lines it means AOS/40k-style 'magic' where the spells are just preset abilities that you can use. No dice pools and no hands of cards means that the system will probably be pretty simple, if there's a 'system' at all - at worst it's preset spells per character, with most of them limited in range and enemy wizards having an x+ 'counter' roll. Their statement that game-deciding spells will be 'rare' probably means the same. If we're lucky, there'll at least be a list of spells to roll/pick from, if we're out of luck it's twenty variations of the 'D6 mortal wounds without calling it that' fireball.

Yeah... for all of the 'classic WFB' talk about the Old World, this is not the direction I thought they'd go, and its a huge change in direction.


Not incredibly thrilled by a return of the 'pushing result' of combat resolution, either. That wasn't all that fun.

This feels a little out of touch with what we were told they were aiming for.

I would love to see a return of some classic scenery options, some of it was superb. I really hope they do something with Warhammer: Siege. Given the way at the start of the project they referenced total war a lot it would make sense that they did something with this.

All I'll say really is that they are making the right noises when talking about this game and I just hope they deliver.

 Undead_Love-Machine wrote:
the wizards tower that looked excellent except for the skulls

Do you have any idea how little that narrows it down?

chaos0xomega wrote:
Personally, to me the article uses a lot of words to not really tell us much in concrete terms. After the whole "10th edition 40k will be less lethal" marketing misfire, I am not inclined to trust empty marketing promises from WarCom without concrete explanations of how the rules actually work.

This. It's amazing how well GW has mastered the art of writing a bunch of words without ever saying anything of substance. Got to meet that article quota even if you have nothing to say!

chaos0xomega wrote:
But thats kinda old news? We already knew they were cribbing from previous editions of the game to develop the rules.

Personally, to me the article uses a lot of words to not really tell us much in concrete terms. After the whole "10th edition 40k will be less lethal" marketing misfire, I am not inclined to trust empty marketing promises from WarCom without concrete explanations of how the rules actually work.

there are some "news" in the details:

- No more magic phase, but spells in other phases
- There is the possibility of a retreat if you lose the combat (and do not flee), not clear if the winner must push back and may advance or may push back and must advance
- The whole rank that is in melee can attack, regardless of base contact
- Units can be as wide as the player wants them to be
- The formation of the unit is an essential part of the game.
- The changes in the rules are based on what the designers have liked and disliked about playing the game over the last few months

and depending on how you read the last part it tells us 2 things
first they really just started recently and it is not a long planned project over years but they decided on what the core rules should be in the past months
second the changes are based in the impression of the designers, not what flaws the game had in the past or balance problems with factions, and it could also mean there are people working on it that never played Warhammer before but just took an Edition and adjusted it

something else that is coming with this, depending on if the change of formation is important during the game or just during the setup, that movement trays to adjust base size won't work well.
also they did not used any trays in the promo pictures

and last, they are referring to older versions of the game with the names and underlining the RPG part, it could really mean they took more influence from 3rd (not that it is a bad thing but if people want R&F combat back, a RPG with some units on the table is not what is expected)

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Personally, to me the article uses a lot of words to not really tell us much in concrete terms. After the whole "10th edition 40k will be less lethal" marketing misfire, I am not inclined to trust empty marketing promises from WarCom without concrete explanations of how the rules actually work.

This. It's amazing how well GW has mastered the art of writing a bunch of words without ever saying anything of substance. Got to meet that article quota even if you have nothing to say!

Yeah. Pretty sure they have no game at all. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor%27s_New_Clothes

I'm good with magic just being a set of abilities though.

 triplegrim wrote:

 ThePaintingOwl wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:
Personally, to me the article uses a lot of words to not really tell us much in concrete terms. After the whole "10th edition 40k will be less lethal" marketing misfire, I am not inclined to trust empty marketing promises from WarCom without concrete explanations of how the rules actually work.

This. It's amazing how well GW has mastered the art of writing a bunch of words without ever saying anything of substance. Got to meet that article quota even if you have nothing to say!

Yeah. Pretty sure they have no game at all. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Emperor%27s_New_Clothes

I'm good with magic just being a set of abilities though.

Nah, I'm sure they have a game. It would be too embarrassing to fail to release a game after all the hype they've built up and too easy to shovel out some quarter-assed update of the last WHFB edition, followed shortly after by quietly dropping it like they've done with other niche games. It may not be a good game but they'll print something and then use its failure to justify their decision to kill off WHFB.

Tsagualsa wrote:

Rihgu wrote:Attacking with the entire front rank... sure hope they put a LOT of thought into this mechanic.

The moment they decided that you can use whatever base sizes you like it was clear that anything but this solution would lead to endless arguments about modelling for advantage

Grail Seeker wrote:The section on magic might be the most interesting part of the article.

If you read between the lines it means AOS/40k-style 'magic' where the spells are just preset abilities that you can use. No dice pools and no hands of cards means that the system will probably be pretty simple, if there's a 'system' at all - at worst it's preset spells per character, with most of them limited in range and enemy wizards having an x+ 'counter' roll. Their statement that game-deciding spells will be 'rare' probably means the same. If we're lucky, there'll at least be a list of spells to roll/pick from, if we're out of luck it's twenty variations of the 'D6 mortal wounds without calling it that' fireball.

There are a lot of assumptions in this, and its not worth arguing about things neither one of us know. it could be as bad as you say, it might not be. But I can say i am definitely interested in a different take on magic in WHB.

 Rihgu wrote:
Attacking with the entire front rank... sure hope they put a LOT of thought into this mechanic.

I'd celebrate giving people a reason to go wide with their formations, but if they don't adjust the movement system in sync with this change, it's going to be a mess.

 kodos wrote:

- The changes in the rules are based on what the designers have liked and disliked about playing the game over the last few months

and depending on how you read the last part it tells us 2 things
first they really just started recently and it is not a long planned project over years but they decided on what the core rules should be in the past months
second the changes are based in the impression of the designers, not what flaws the game had in the past or balance problems with factions, and it could also mean there are people working on it that never played Warhammer before but just took an Edition and adjusted it

The article doesn't say "the last few months", it says "For several months the designers regularly assembled to play games of every edition of Warhammer Fantasy Battle".

Could have been recent, could have been a year ago. To say they just started recently is speculation at best.

if they would have done that 1-2 years ago, that very same article could have also released 1-2 years ago

it says nothing really but that "nothing" would have generated hype 1 year ago while now not so much
that we did not got it earlier were hints for rules changes would have been more important for the marketing rather than covering a computer game tells me that there was nothing to write about regarding rules back than

and I also wrote "depending on how you read it" not that it is an absolute fact

Marketing generally works on a timeline of a strategy, it is usually not a rush to release information the minute it is done.

and GW marketing generally does not tell anything until pre-order starts

so we must expect pre-orders next Saturday TOW marketing follows the general pattern