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.

EDIT - NVM. Seems verboten discussion, didn't see it before posting.

 GenericLordOnPegasus wrote:
A whole bunch of stuff...

I find myself in a peculiar position...

Your post has some important merits in some of the points, but the way you come off like a ... not nice person... drowns them out.


I find the release of this game refreshingly interesting. I see that they pretty much picked up where they left off in 8th'/ 9th edition and release schedules seems to continue at the same point. I've seen some of the rules, and they are as well cleaned up, but there are some glaringly odd points that need some reevaluation.

I'm focused on Mordhiem, so with the releases, I look at them as "What can I use in Mordheim, rather then in AOS, or "Old World".

It's fantasy to me. As far as I'm concerned it will be Fantasy, and I will hook or crook my figures and lists as I see fit.

After it is all said and done, the effort is fine, seeing as the GW personnel and department heads are all pretty much new, and do not know the ins and outs of WFB that came before them as far as releases and development...

To end with positivity, I would like to see the game continue to improve, and even if there are scale creep issues, and craptastic base issues, I will be supporting this in different places, but I won't be jumping on any new armies anytime soon, with a closet of stuff to enjoy.

Great Job for a change, GW. You hit it out of the park on the herculean effort to bring this game to the market.

"Two bulls sat on top of a hill, looking down on thier local GW Shop..."

Thanks everyone for feedback on my rebasing guide (linked below), I just started with the 8th basing guide I found online created for the swap from 8th to AOS ages ago.

I actually sent the PDF to GW also to see if they wanted to post it to WarCom to further assist the transition to Old World for us veterans.


https://drive.google.com/file/d/19KmYEa0r7tr-6fuHJRVfUQayMa7nl_h6/view?usp=sharing

Was so excited to hear old Warhammer was coming back and especially Brits!

Was at GW and heard price of Pegasus at $65 and 3 cavalry for $60 from manager and I said-

“Wow, GW is selling painted miniatures now?”

He and the others in store started laughing. Then I understood. 😳

 nathan2004 wrote:
Thanks everyone for feedback on my rebasing guide (linked below), I just started with the 8th basing guide I found online created for the swap from 8th to AOS ages ago.

I actually sent the PDF to GW also to see if they wanted to post it to WarCom to further assist the transition to Old World for us veterans.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/19KmYEa0r7tr-6fuHJRVfUQayMa7nl_h6/view?usp=sharing

Thanks for doing this!

 GenericLordOnPegasus wrote:
Man, the negativity here, on top of the outright nonsense being spouted (low effort game, less than a year, whaaaaaaa things are expensive) is absolutely ridiculous.

If you disallow discerning voices, you'd have an echo chamber and render discussion pointless. People have a right to criticise - particularly when it comes to pricing. If you disagree, present counter arguments.

 GenericLordOnPegasus wrote:
The ruleset is fantastic.

Citation needed. You have not played a single game of it yet, the same as everyone else who didn't get the books ahead of time for marketing content.

 GenericLordOnPegasus wrote:
If you wanted a streamlined ruleset, they literally already have games for you. Both AOS and 10th edition 40k couldn’t be simpler. The rest of us actually wanted Warhammer Fantasy, and that’s what we got.

Wanting the rules to be clearly, consistently and concisely worded doesn't mean 'streamlined' - and it's something GW are notoriously bad at. By all accounts thus far, this ruleset is no improvement in terms of its technical writing.
I wouldn't touch AoS or 10th 40k with a barge pole for a number of reasons, but that's not relevant here.

 GenericLordOnPegasus wrote:
The seven factions that are “legacy” are literally all available to buy, whether original models or updated sculpts

A cursory glance at the AoS section of the website shows the relevant models as 'online only', a lot of which are out of stock, and in a model count/price ratio that is far from practical for the TOW ruleset; charging £25+ for 10 when you would need at minimum 20 for a reasonable unit in most cases. Wasn't that one of the main issues that caused WHFB to be ended in the first place?
As GW themselves say, those factions are for all intents and purposes not part of the game. The legacy rules provided will let players who already have those factions use them, which is fine: but it's highly unlikely anyone is going to be starting up new armies for them.

 GenericLordOnPegasus wrote:
and who gives a gak what GW says? TO’s will do what needs to be done just as we have for literally decades now to ensure they are playable.

Which is fine for individual groups, but having a common unified version of the rules that is at least reasonably balanced is preferred for the game to get any kind of traction, for the kind of 'pick-up play' that for a lot of people is the primary way tabletop games are played.

 GenericLordOnPegasus wrote:
This is a specialist game made by a small team.

So are the other specialist games; and yet many of them have more substantial launches than this. Horus Heresy did. Legions Imperialis did. TOW has had, at best, the same development times they did. So what's the excuse?

 GenericLordOnPegasus wrote:
The game has been in play testing for over a year now

Citation needed.

 GenericLordOnPegasus wrote:
and after having seen people go through the rulebook, it seems like they did a great job fixing a lot of the problems WHFB had at the end of its life.

Problems 8th edition created by being...well, dreadful. The fact that random charges still exist for everything (even if it's been mitigated), and the fact that combat resolution has no bearing on actually breaking an enemy, are big red flags for me.

 GenericLordOnPegasus wrote:
Almost everything is sold out everywhere, so people saying we don’t know if launch was a success are being ridiculous. Selling out is the definition of success, and everyone I know was able to get everything they wanted except for the resin models that seem to have been delayed in America for whatever reason. Stuff happens.

First of all, there have already been reports that the Tomb Kings box has not sold out everywhere - but even so, selling out isn't indicative of anything beyond 'they sold the stock they had' since we've no idea at all how much they actually produced for it. TOW being a success or not is something that can't be determined until further down the line, where we see if it's still being supported or if it is relegated to the same treatment as Necromunda. From my recollection, Aeronautica Imperialis sold out when it launched, too - and look what happened to that.
Your anecdotal evidence and 'I'm alright, Jack' attitude don't prove anything, either. Quite a lot of people, even just here, reported being stuck in queues for queues and ultimately not being able to buy anything. They way GW handle big releases like this is undeniably a 'FOMO' strategy, and clearly it still works.

 GenericLordOnPegasus wrote:
The hilarious thing is that those who aren’t happy seem to feel the need to scream about it as loudly as possible. Not happy? Don’t play. The rest of us will be having a blast playing the game we love with the models we want to play it with.

Nobody has been 'screaming' anything, and the idea that there is an overwhelming silent majority is a very old, tired argument. Your attempt to characterise anyone voicing criticism as some hysterical troll does not lend your position any creditability.

 GenericLordOnPegasus wrote:
And the people who don’t like old sculpts realize there are dozens of STL’s online, and even if they don’t have a printer, I guarantee all but the smallest towns now have a printing service. Seriously, every single fantasy army has beautiful models out there you can buy and use. Nobody is holding s gun to your head and making you play GW models. Except for GW’s own events, I have never seen a TO stop anyone from playing 3rd party models.

If the majority of models on offer are so poor or so outdated that people are encouraged to go to 3rd party sites/services for their armies, it's not exactly going to send a message to GW that the game is worth supporting - their only concern is the money it makes them. And it would have been nice to see these neglected and discontinued armies get a little more than a unit each and a few character models.

 GenericLordOnPegasus wrote:
The ruleset looks great

To you. Others are not so keen.

 GenericLordOnPegasus wrote:
The FoF/RH are great indexes

Citation needed. Why do they exist as two entirely seperate books at all? Why are the army lists not part of the main rulebook? These are rhetorical questions, of course: this way you are required to buy at least two expensive hardbacks instead of one.

 GenericLordOnPegasus wrote:
and the Arcane Journals are completely unnecessary

You said it. They are the definition of day one DLC - just because they arn't absolutely required to play does not justify their existence. Why is their content not included in the main army lists? Again, a rhetorical question.

 GenericLordOnPegasus wrote:
Otherwise, MM/MWG have said the Legacy PDF factions are just as fleshed out as the official factions, and that they are very playable.

For now. But as the rest of the game progresses and the 'main' factions gain new content, those legacy factions will fall behind until they are no longer so playable. We've seen that happen as far back as WHFB 6th ed - remember Wood Elves and Bretonnians prior to their books?

 GenericLordOnPegasus wrote:
Also, making models is expensive. I don’t know why people think old sculpts should be cheaper because they aren’t new? They take the same manpower, time, storage, and shipping costs (more in the case of metal)

Perhaps it's something to do with the fact that the costs associated with designing and sculpting those models would have been paid off long ago, and they no longer meet the same standards of quality that GW are supposed to offer for their premium prices? How is it that other companies can offer better, more recent models for less than GW are expecting for thirty-year old skeletons?

 GenericLordOnPegasus wrote:
Saying otherwise is the dumb opinion of people who have never run a business and don’t understand the costs associated with production and retail.

Perhaps if you made an attempt to address the actual arguments, rather than resorting to childish name calling and attempting to shout down all criticism, your position could be taken more seriously.

 MalusCalibur wrote:

 GenericLordOnPegasus wrote:
The ruleset is fantastic.

Citation needed. You have not played a single game of it yet, the same as everyone else who didn't get the books ahead of time for marketing content.

But by the same virtue you must also discredit all those saying its a "poor nostalgia cash grab rulset that's poorly written" etc. As they too have not yet played a game.

The axe some people have to grind in this thread, I don’t get it. Where on the doll did GW touch you, can you point?

 nathan2004 wrote:
The axe some people have to grind in this thread, I don’t get it. Where on the doll did GW touch you, can you point?

I love how it's meant to be N&R thread but instead has devolved into an argument between for and against TOW.

 nathan2004 wrote:
The axe some people have to grind in this thread, I don’t get it. Where on the doll did GW touch you, can you point?

When GW nuked the game. Many are still bitter....I was bitter as all hell when they threw the game I enjoyed in the bin. I got over it however and came to the realization that GW didn't know what they were doing with Fantasy anyway, so maybe tossing it for something new was for the best. I am quite happy for GW to treat this like a specialist game and I can live with limited releases since, well, I have 6 armies.

tarnished wrote:

 nathan2004 wrote:
The axe some people have to grind in this thread, I don’t get it. Where on the doll did GW touch you, can you point?

I love how it's meant to be N&R thread but instead has devolved into an argument between for and against TOW.

This happens in all news threads when they run out of news





and when the mods haven't given us an Old World section to argue in

 Overread wrote:

tarnished wrote:

 nathan2004 wrote:
The axe some people have to grind in this thread, I don’t get it. Where on the doll did GW touch you, can you point?

I love how it's meant to be N&R thread but instead has devolved into an argument between for and against TOW.

This happens in all news threads when they run out of news





and when the mods haven't given us an Old World section to argue in

Fair call

 nathan2004 wrote:
The axe some people have to grind in this thread, I don’t get it. Where on the doll did GW touch you, can you point?

Jokes aside, I'm very critical about GW releases but from what I've seen of the books so far (waiting to get them so I can actually read them) is pretty good. I do think they could have been consolidated into single volumes & I would like to have seen a bit more hobby content in the arcane journals but overall, three books to play every old world army isn't so bad.

I know they have maximised books to increase profit, it could have been worse. They could have changed the scale or something similar to invalidate old collections but unlike Epic/legions they instead went the book route.

I'm a bit annoyed they are dropping armies which are (to me) quintessentially the spirit of warhammer, but whatever. If the legacy stuff sucks, then I'll just play another edition. I'm not precious about rules (and as my group play on my tables & I have several 'loaner' armies, they tend to play what I have available). If the pdfs turn out to be decent against the published lists then I'll just invest in getting them printing into another volume and keep them together as a 'complete' version of TOW. At the end of the day, GW are the only ones that loose out here as I'll buy more 2nd hand minis or alternatives. Or maybe even paint the insane backlog I already have!

And as White Dwarf is....not very good any more I'd rather have a couple of new Arcane Journals with limited content every now and then, rather than have to go around chasing the odd issue of white dwarf for small updates for the game like an extra infamy army list etc.

I might change my mind when the game actually arrives and I go over the books, but tbh there is still a ton of old warhammer fantasy content which I've never read/used/enjoyed , so at worst tow might make me pull out the old rulebooks instead.

 Mallo wrote:

 nathan2004 wrote:
it could have been worse. They could have changed the scale or something similar to invalidate old collections but unlike Epic/legions they instead went the book route.

Agreed. I think many of the people critical of 1 or 2 things about TOW, are like me generally happy with the rerelease. Its closer to classic Warhammer than I dared believe, hasnt invalidated anything of value (I'll accept the pdf's), and genereally seems like a solid release, all in all. We're never going to be top dog in our life time anyway, that all 40k for now.

As long as they have an Old World ongoing specialist game, it also gives new shelf life and some synergy to anything classic warhammer, 6th purists, 7th grognards, 8th fanbois, WAP, Reneissance and whater else there is.

I consider TOW to have become paritally vaporware, uneccesarily late in getting released and more, but all I really care about is that there are actually a rulebook to play with. Must add the rules looks solid so far, from what I could squint from a youtube paused screen

 RaptorusRex wrote:
I agree, but this is an awfully confrontational first post.

Perhaps, but at least they read the room. This thread has become a cesspool of negativity. Personally, I'm excited to have my favorite game back.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 frankelee wrote:
The LVO is in two weeks and The Old World is already out of the hype cycle. I do wonder when new armies and army sets will become available. Maybe one new army a quarter until 2026. Kislev and Cathay get all new ranges to be completed between 2027 and 2030. With unforeseen delays of course to change those dates. This way the anticipation for The Old World to come out never really ends!

You do know that the next preview is technically BEFORE any Old World products release, right?

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

 RaptorusRex wrote:
I agree, but this is an awfully confrontational first post.

Perhaps, but at least they read the room. This thread has become a cesspool of negativity. Personally, I'm excited to have my favorite game back.

Personally, I feel 80% of the negativity in GW circlejerks are people complaining about negativity, patting themself on the back for calling out some ghost he conjures up for the occassion.

On a rumor note, anyone seen anything from the PDF's thinking about skaven in particular? I'll be happy to squint at youtube stills if thats what it takes. Are very uplifted and positive for the pdf after seeing the Dwarfen mountain holds army list, which all in all seemed a decent work (despite a few possible ugly combos).

 triplegrim wrote:
On a rumor note, anyone seen anything from the PDF's thinking about skaven in particular? I'll be happy to squint at youtube stills if thats what it takes. Are very uplifted and positive for the pdf after seeing the Dwarfen mountain holds army list, which all in all seemed a decent work (despite a few possible ugly combos).

You're not gonna hear a peep about legacy armies until the pdfs are out, NDAs are serious business. But at least Mountain Miniatures seems to have seen them and has videos ready to fire on release day.

 Grot 6 wrote:
I'm focused on Mordhiem, so with the releases, I look at them as "What can I use in Mordheim, rather then in AOS, or "Old World".

I'm basically in the same boat.

I never really liked WHFB, and whilst certain factions (Lizardmen, Brets, Undead, Wood Elves) garnered a certain amount of interest, I never wanted to play the game.

However, along came a little game called Warhammer Quest, and I adore that game, and still play it to this day. I have tons of fantasy stuff (and AoS stuff), and it's all been purchased for Quest purposes. So TOW for me is just a place to get more stuff for Quest, and it's why I was really looking forward to new plastic Ushabti... and not hyper-expensive ancient metal Ushabti.

tarnished wrote:
I love how it's meant to be N&R thread but instead has devolved into an argument between for and against TOW.

I am distinctly reminded of a Penny Arcade comic from 23 years ago.

 triplegrim wrote:
Personally, I feel 80% of the negativity in GW circlejerks are people complaining about negativity, patting themself on the back for calling out some ghost he conjures up for the occassion.

Happened in a recent 40k thread. The people complaining the most and being the most dour were the people complaining about everyone being negative. Kind of a self-fulfilling (not to mention self-defeating) prophecy.

Looking back a few pages and I'm really not sure where this idea that everyone's negative and critical is coming from.

Now that we've got a pretty complete picture of what TOW is, I'm cautiously interested in the game system. But I have to say, putting 2024 prices on kits from 2004, with the design and mold costs long since paid off, is a lot. WHFB was never a cheap game to get into but at GW prices for two-decade-old models it's going to be a hard sell to anyone not already invested in WHFB or at least in the GW sphere.

Maybe just appealing to grognards is the entire raison d'etre for this product and will be enough to keep it going, time will tell. I'll certainly be pulling my Ogres out of storage and giving it a try.

I would love to hear from anyone that has played the game how Elite high Ld vs chaff low Ld plays out - the rules as described so far give me little indication your chaff units are going to be very useful.

I've not seen any rules to indicate the game won't split the effectiveness of these units bimodally, rather than in a normal distribution - ie that the rules now make elite units even better and chaff units even worse, pushing further apart.

This is the aspect of the game that will make or break my interest. So far, the WS, I and Ld rules as advertised by GW only support a bimodal worsening of chaff and improving of elite.

The lack of step up further compounds this already compounded scenario.

Oh no.

Oh no no no no no.

I realized I can fill the 25% core requirement at 2000pts with a unit of 35 upgraded tomb guard or a unit of 12 upgraded sepulchral stalkers at 2500 pts....

I *can* build a Tomb Kings army with using only the newer kits....

If you can sit through the torture of building that many Stalkers, that is...

Are they not a pleasant kit to build?

The riders are a pain in the neck, but honestly the part that was most frustrating was actually something that should be simple: Sticking them to the bases. They might look flat, but they're not, so it took a bit of pressing (and holding) to get them to stay there, and not bend back up and detach themselves from the bases.

Plus they're fiddly. Not current-year-GW-jigsaw-puzzle-Terminators-with-8-piece-bodies-but-no-posability fiddly, but as they're spindly and have lots of small parts it makes things unnecessarily painful.

I've built 6 (3 of each type), and that was more than enough for me.

What are the chances they’ll re release the old plastic fanatic kit? It was full of fun bits

Dudeface wrote:

But by the same virtue you must also discredit all those saying its a "poor nostalgia cash grab rulset that's poorly written" etc. As they too have not yet played a game.

You don't need to play a game to know if it's written poorly. You just need to read the rules, which the folk doing video reviews have done. All indication is that TOW's follow the usual GW pattern of having terrible technical writing.
As for the 'nostalgia cash grab' part, I've already outlined the reasons for that conclusion, and none of them require playing the game to see.

chaos0xomega wrote:
Oh no.

Oh no no no no no.

I realized I can fill the 25% core requirement at 2000pts with a unit of 35 upgraded tomb guard or a unit of 12 upgraded sepulchral stalkers at 2500 pts....

I *can* build a Tomb Kings army with using only the newer kits....

Thanks for this Chaos, Tomb Kings here I come!

chaos0xomega wrote:
Oh no.

Oh no no no no no.

I realized I can fill the 25% core requirement at 2000pts with a unit of 35 upgraded tomb guard or a unit of 12 upgraded sepulchral stalkers at 2500 pts....

I *can* build a Tomb Kings army with using only the newer kits....

Or, If you don’t mind going in debt, you use tomb guard as basic skeletons and give them the spear heads from the stalkers riders

Cyel wrote:
Ah, yes, I get it Not bragging, though, it was pretty obvious for anyone with even a little experience that Frenzy=trouble (hence "kids with Khorne" because only newbies could fall into that trap).

Even if I could brag about some of my experiences back than, beating a Khorne army is like the complete opposite of anything even remotely "braggable" More a synonym of taking a lollypop from a kid, so a bit embarassing, really, when you needed to do it at a tournament for example...


I kind of remember some ambitious projects from really good players, who were trying to work around the problem by carefully corraling (by blocking LOS or charge corridors) these frenzied Khornate Knights with non-frenzied units until they were ready to charge, but I don't think I have ever seen it actually work. It was jumping thorugh a lot of hoops for a very unreliable result.

I did it a lot with my Khanite DE army. You just keep something cheap and expendable in front of your frenzied troops on the crucial turn. After that, they're in combat and doing what they need to be doing.

If that sounds simple, that's because it is. Of course, simple is not the same thing as easy, mind you.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Gert wrote:
Better to be safe than fight Disney.

Did Marvel create their Malekith before GW did? I was never a big Thor fan.

Sometimes life is about learning which fights are important to make; which are not worth it and which are best to just avoid the potential of one happening entirely.


Because even if you can win, if there's an easy way to just not have to fight at all; that can sometimes be the right course of action to take.


It also might have nothing to do with that at all. It might be GW just went with the new name because its easier brand wise to link things up; heck perhaps the person in charge of that choice is newer or just forgot the old name because the new one was being used all the time.

Sometimes being a fan makes it easier to keep track of the lore because you just have the lore; whilst a person employed has the lore; and all the revisions of that; and the parts that never got published; and the parts coming next week; and those deadlines for other projects; and this and that that are all related.