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.

I think the GW copy write protection comes from the strange names (orruks rather than orcs) combine with the very pronounced new esthetics.

Lumineth may be high elves, but they are high elves with a strong elemental bent that is nothing like anyone was producing before. The same can be said for almost any faction in AOS. They take the basic faction from WFB and turn some dial on it from 5 up to 11 to create a unique spin on that faction. This creates models that other produces are unlikely to copy. Additionally, it makes such a copy harder to defend as not being "stolen" from their IP.

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
Why would you object to legacy allies at this point anyway? They're in pretty much the same boat as all bar two factions today as it is.

And as it is, I'm now convinced GW actually DOES have a plan for at least one of them. Why are repeater crossbows listed in the main rules when Dark Elves are the only army that uses them?

Because despite what some people think, the Legacy armies are just as valid a part of the game as Tomb Kings etc.

 Dysartes wrote:
Why would you object to legacy allies at this point anyway? They're in pretty much the same boat as all bar two factions today as it is.

For the poster you're addressing it's been evident that it's pure schadenfreude. Their emotional investment in trying to convince everyone of the impossibility of official TW factions being expanded -- not to mention the similar way they've historically spoken to anyone making a "why can't they do xenos armies in system X" lamentation in other threads -- has always given their game away.

Overread wrote:The whole "AoS was improving GW copyright protection over what Old World did" is something people keep saying, but honestly I don't buy it. There's just nothing inherent within AoS that offers more protection save for a product name change. Heck several armies are almost 100% Old World models and even when they've been updated they are often replaced with very similar designs.

It was not about that it actually did something but that a manager thought it must be done
people forget that during that time GW banned fan-fiction, argued that forums are not allowed to talk about points cost and thought they send copyright letters to people who quote the rules text on discussions about rule questions
their paranoia was that strong during that days that blowing up the world because the IP has no future is making the most sense
specially as their idea of selling the new game was the same as selling the old game and that did not work out well

Manfred von Drakken wrote:And as it is, I'm now convinced GW actually DOES have a plan for at least one of them. Why are repeater crossbows listed in the main rules when Dark Elves are the only army that uses them?

would not be the first rule in a GW rulebook that ends up not being used by anyone at the end of an edition

Aye. 6th had a bunch of them in the BRB.

As much as i hope to the contrary.

MaxT wrote:
Or the ones initially sent out weren't the final version. Who here hasn't accidentally sent copy of final v2.1 instead of copy of copy of final v2.1 ?

I think you'll find the current legal versions are actually copy of copy of final v2.1 FINAL NO ACTUALLY FINAL USE THIS ONE DEBORAH.doc

More proof, in case anyone needs it, that all the stuff about Kislev that GW showed was total bunk. They used assets from a video game and tried to say it was development for The Old World.

Link: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2024/02/06/riders-of-the-dead-read-an-exclusive-excerpt-from-this-years-readers-choice-winner/

and foreseeable future can mean anything from 12 months to 12 years

GW tend to view the world in 3 month bursts with marketing. They've also been clear that they are getting the existing/previous armies out first. So that will at least mean a good chunk of time before they touch any new armies. That's honestly nothing new and the same info we've had for a while now since they previewed the TK and Brets.

kodos wrote:Link: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2024/02/06/riders-of-the-dead-read-an-exclusive-excerpt-from-this-years-readers-choice-winner/

and foreseeable future can mean anything from 12 months to 12 years

I don't know what to tell you. Words have an agreed on meaning in English.

Overread wrote:GW tend to view the world in 3 month bursts with marketing. They've also been clear that they are getting the existing/previous armies out first. So that will at least mean a good chunk of time before they touch any new armies. That's honestly nothing new and the same info we've had for a while now since they previewed the TK and Brets.

Yes you are correct, it is nothing new, GW to their credit has been very up front lately that they are not doing anything with Kislev. What they aren't being up front about is that the initial stuff was straight up fabrication.

 caladancid wrote:


Yes you are correct, it is nothing new, GW to their credit has been very up front lately that they are not doing anything with Kislev. What they aren't being up front about is that the initial stuff was straight up fabrication.

No, it just means that they aren't leading with Kislev and Cathay. Both appear very clearly in the BRB and yes whilst they've used video game assets to make artwork of them in the book that's nothing new there either

Most likely GW's approach could be the result of several elements
1) A desire to get existing armies out because if they started with "new" ones they'd know they'd get a lot of complaints from former customers about not getting their army released yet.
2) Management might want to see actual numbers and sales figures before investing in moulds for two fully new armies. This might be especially because the whole project got messed up during Covid - heck perhaps the original budget was used to do other things so the team has to re-justify their project. Hence again going with a lower cost restoration to get actual sales figures to justify army wide investments
3) Development of them isn't yet finished and GW chose to thus release existing armies instead of pushing for a further off release date. This might even just be part of them slotting this in around other things and getting it out in the market sooner rather than later.
4) They might have thought sales would be higher for old armies with old models if they released them first rather than a totlaly brand new pair of armies with all new models then followed by "old" models because GW can't afford to justify the cost of re-vamping every single army at once.

And gw's forseaable future means anything past 3 months they are super tight lipped. Beyond 6 months they tell even less. Over year? Nope not happening.

So when gw says not in forseeable future could come out in may. Their community marketing team doesn't know that long so saying truth

There is no new edition coming to 40K in the foreseeable future either. I am still confident to take bets on it happening around summer 2026.

 Vulcan wrote:

 Tim the Biovore wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:
I broke down and bought the Brettonia set - waiting for it arrive, and was looking over my incomplete High Elf army only to realize that GW discontinued most of the High Elf models (I guess Lumineth replaced them?). Are any of the TOW High Elf minis still sold by GW at this time?

Lumineth are Lumineth, the High Elves were pulled from Cities of Sigmar in stages since 2015, with the last few leaving the most recent Battletome to bring them back in to The Old World. None of them are currently sold at this time, but most should be back once High Elves receive their Arcane Journal, though when that might be is anyone's guess

Lumineth are High Elves that can be copyrighted; that's literally the only difference. The aesthetic is generally the same.
.

 alextroy wrote:
I think the GW copy write protection comes from the strange names (orruks rather than orcs) combine with the very pronounced new esthetics.

Lumineth may be high elves, but they are high elves with a strong elemental bent that is nothing like anyone was producing before. The same can be said for almost any faction in AOS. They take the basic faction from WFB and turn some dial on it from 5 up to 11 to create a unique spin on that faction. This creates models that other produces are unlikely to copy. Additionally, it makes such a copy harder to defend as not being "stolen" from their IP.

There is nothing about either of those that is "more copyrightable". Names are covered by trademarks, not copyright. And them having a different more unique aesthetic doesn't offer any more protection, because you don't own themes/ideas/styles. They own the specific model sculpt itself, not the aesthetic design that it has.

tneva82 wrote:
And gw's forseaable future means anything past 3 months they are super tight lipped. Beyond 6 months they tell even less. Over year? Nope not happening.

So when gw says not in forseeable future could come out in may. Their community marketing team doesn't know that long so saying truth

That doesn't really make that much sense when previously already said they would be released for it at some point. Won't say they're coming at some point if they're more than 3-6 months away, when they already said they were coming years ago when there was a much longer gap.

It’s been nearly a month and we still haven’t seen wave 2 of TK/Brets (with things we know are in but weren’t in Wave 1) or wave 1 of Orcs which we know is coming.

Depending on if they’re pairing factions or not for the remainder, at 1-2 months per faction we’re looking at 9-18 mths to release the core factions which would be ‘foreseeable future’.

This is a perfect case study for why people get disappointed when their thing does not come out.

GW is literally calling it out, voluntarily, in their article that Kislev is not on the menu for the Old World. That means they think it is important to be as clear as possible that this thing is NOT happening. Nobody made them write that - they chose to do so because it is important to them that you understand this.

The responses? "Nah, that doesn't mean anything, could even be released in May, whatever, nothing new here."

Working at GW must feel like that guy trying to get Patrick Star to admit that the wallet is his.

 Darnok wrote:
There is no new edition coming to 40K in the foreseeable future either. I am still confident to take bets on it happening around summer 2026.

Which given the definition of the word, would make it.....foreseeable.

You want to take bets on when Kislev is showing up?

 caladancid wrote:

 Darnok wrote:
There is no new edition coming to 40K in the foreseeable future either. I am still confident to take bets on it happening around summer 2026.

Which given the definition of the word, would make it.....foreseeable.

You want to take bets on when Kislev is showing up?

Eventually.

If the game is successful, the game will evolve and where GW takes it is up to them...if not it will die again. I'm not sure why people can't accept this...

It is important to note that GW officals said during the release/hype up for Adeptus Titanicus that there was not going to be an Epic transition. That Epic wouldn't happen/come back, but it did come out about 5 years or so later.

There's nothing stopping GW from doing campaign books that will bring in other factions, like an Elven Civil War which would introduce Dark Elves. Cathay being invaded by Chaos which might pull in Ogre Kingdoms, Chaos Dwarfs, and Cathay. A Lustria book for Skaven and Lizardmen. So much is just possibility right now with GW, time will tell if they can manage the game system along with their other games/IP's.

 caladancid wrote:
I don't know what to tell you. Words have an agreed on meaning in English.

and I am long enough around that I know that everything GW marketing is saying will be "technically correct" in the best case

anything that haven't seen already a pre-order announcement is not "foreseeable"
also "never" has a defined meaning, yet for GW is a "we have not yet decided"

Mr.Pickels wrote:
It is important to note that GW officals said during the release/hype up for Adeptus Titanicus that there was not going to be an Epic transition. That Epic wouldn't happen/come back, but it did come out about 5 years or so later.

There's nothing stopping GW from doing campaign books that will bring in other factions, like an Elven Civil War which would introduce Dark Elves. Cathay being invaded by Chaos which might pull in Ogre Kingdoms, Chaos Dwarfs, and Cathay. A Lustria book for Skaven and Lizardmen. So much is just possibility right now with GW, time will tell if they can manage the game system along with their other games/IP's.

There's a bit of a difference between something like "That's not planned at the moment" and the "They're not going to be part of this project/game, even as we update the narrative" for TOW.

I think the most problematic thing with Kislev right now is that GW has revived whole ranges of old models of a very specific charming style, and if we would see new Kislev they would be of a more modern style.

Perhaps not a big problem, but I think if they had dropped brand new kislev lots of people would assume their favourite faction is about to get an update, and rather wait than getting the old models. .

 Fayric wrote:


Perhaps not a big problem, but I think if they had dropped brand new kislev lots of people would assume their favourite faction is about to get an update, and rather wait than getting the old models. .

Yep and I think that might be why GW have gone with old models first. Because they can't just do 10 or so FULL armies worth of new models in a row for one game.

Now a few armies, like High Elves are already reasonably full of new models; but some are just chock full of old stuff.


I figure doing it this way gets the old-school fans active; gets sales metrics and data and tells GW if its going to work. IT could be they launched Old World and -- it fizzled because for all the online chatter no one took it up or they were all in other games/AoS. From there GW can allocate more resources.


I still figure we'll see Kisleve and Cathay either as an end of edition release or a big 2.0 release leading into the next game. It all depends on how fast GW can get the current roster of models out and on if they want to then do the new armies or go into an update path and start doing more updates for the existing armies. It also depends on if Old World is going to join the 3 year development cycle for editions.

After the return of Genestealer Cults, Sisters and Squats (Votann), never discount GW as never (re)doing something.

It’s looking like this will be a case that all the Old World will return at some point, they’re just dribbling and doling it out between their main moneymakers. When they run out of old stuff to reissue, they’ll likely turn their attention to new forces like Kislev and Cathay - but we’re probably talking 3-5 years at least.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

Mr.Pickels wrote:
It is important to note that GW officals said during the release/hype up for Adeptus Titanicus that there was not going to be an Epic transition. That Epic wouldn't happen/come back, but it did come out about 5 years or so later.

There's nothing stopping GW from doing campaign books that will bring in other factions, like an Elven Civil War which would introduce Dark Elves. Cathay being invaded by Chaos which might pull in Ogre Kingdoms, Chaos Dwarfs, and Cathay. A Lustria book for Skaven and Lizardmen. So much is just possibility right now with GW, time will tell if they can manage the game system along with their other games/IP's.

There's a bit of a difference between something like "That's not planned at the moment" and the "They're not going to be part of this project/game, even as we update the narrative" for TOW.

easy, they can just call this "project" done and open a new project on the fly in 12 months and call it "technically correct"

we may see a return of army books right after the 9 journals are done, specially as any new faction will need a full army book without rules in the other books
it really just depends on how long GW will take to get the remaining 7 journals out, we may even get a series of campaign books, than a new edition so that they count this as new project and maybe the first army with a full army book are Dark Elves because by that time they have fallen from AoS and were replaced with something different

 Gimgamgoo wrote:

chaos0xomega wrote:

Im opposite. Legacy factions taking core allies is a non-issue for me. Core factions taking legacy allies is a backdoor for legacy stuff in core games when I'd prefer to not play with legacy stuff (to clarify - I'm ok with having games against or with legacy armies on occasion, but I'd really prefer to play core-only most of the time. Allowing core factions to take legacy allies creates potentially awkward situations where myself/others of the same mindset could be taken by surprise and have to tactfully work out how to turn down the game or ask your opponent to modify their list, etc.).

I take it you're a tournament player? Every game must count towards practice against a tournament worthy opponent?
And those GW diehards who just so happened to have invested years in the 'wrong' faction and have been booted out the old world now, can sod off?
Lovely way to split the community for the sake of following GW's tournament only rules. I expect in 40k you no longer play on 6' x 4' and only play on official 5' x 3'8 tables.
Sheesh.

Haven't touched a tournament for any GW game since ~2011 nor more broadly for any tabletop wargame since ~2014, so... no.

I also only play on 6x4s.

But, yknow, great job making poor assumptions.

ccs wrote:

 Manfred von Drakken wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
Why would you object to legacy allies at this point anyway? They're in pretty much the same boat as all bar two factions today as it is.

And as it is, I'm now convinced GW actually DOES have a plan for at least one of them. Why are repeater crossbows listed in the main rules when Dark Elves are the only army that uses them?

Because despite what some people think, the Legacy armies are just as valid a part of the game as Tomb Kings etc.

Not to me. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Mind you I say that as someone who still has my Ogre Kingdoms army set up for WHFB, and likewise has a Chaos Dwarf army ready to go, and is eyeing a dark elf army. The legacy armies are a tier above fanmade in my eyes. I'll have an occasional game with them and enjoy them as hobby projects, but at GW has made abundantly clear, "they aren't part of the journey" and they clearly have no long term future as GW moves forward with updates and revisions to the core factions and leaves them behind with power creep.

 Altruizine wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
Why would you object to legacy allies at this point anyway? They're in pretty much the same boat as all bar two factions today as it is.

For the poster you're addressing it's been evident that it's pure schadenfreude. Their emotional investment in trying to convince everyone of the impossibility of official TW factions being expanded -- not to mention the similar way they've historically spoken to anyone making a "why can't they do xenos armies in system X" lamentation in other threads -- has always given their game away.

if thats what you have to tell yourself to make yourself feel better? I'm sorry I hurt you.

 Altruizine wrote:

 Dysartes wrote:
Why would you object to legacy allies at this point anyway? They're in pretty much the same boat as all bar two factions today as it is.

For the poster you're addressing it's been evident that it's pure schadenfreude. Their emotional investment in trying to convince everyone of the impossibility of official TW factions being expanded -- not to mention the similar way they've historically spoken to anyone making a "why can't they do xenos armies in system X" lamentation in other threads -- has always given their game away.

Nah. Warcoms definition of "forseeable future" is somewhere between a week and three months. A month before the current daemon prince kit was released I commented on a facebook post (don't remember the context) about how I was hoping for a resculpted daemon prince kit. Warcom responded to the effect of "we haven't heard anything about one but we'll be sure to share news about it if we ever do!" or something to that. Lo and behold a few weeks later they literally previewed the exact model. And thats just one personal anecdote, over the years theres been a number of other examples of Warcom saying "we don't know anything" or "we have no news about this" etc. only for a few weeks or months later that exact thing to happen.

Now, if this was one of the articles written by a member of the design studio, then I would take the message seriously - but its not.

 phandaal wrote:
This is a perfect case study for why people get disappointed when their thing does not come out.
GW is literally calling it out, voluntarily, in their article that Kislev is not on the menu for the Old World. That means they think it is important to be as clear as possible that this thing is NOT happening. Nobody made them write that - they chose to do so because it is important to them that you understand this.
The responses? "Nah, that doesn't mean anything, could even be released in May, whatever, nothing new here."
Working at GW must feel like that guy trying to get Patrick Star to admit that the wallet is his.

Ehh. Yes, but also no. Theres a lot of news that GW puts out and either people never read or understand it to mean something completely different than what it actually says. This is something that those who follow the company know closely should know better about, because they've made exact statements like this on numerous occasions only for it to happen a short span later. Likewise, the frequency with which they say things are coming "soon" only for them to not show up until much later. Point is that the warcom team generally doesn't know much aside from the limited window that GW provides them - which is actually very limited. I think it was Louise Sugden who said post-departure that often Warcom were amongst the last within the company to know about upcoming releases, etc.

The truly bizarro world interpretation of this bit of news is from those who are reading it and saying "well clearly we won't see Kislev for many many years, if at all".

 Fayric wrote:
I think the most problematic thing with Kislev right now is that GW has revived whole ranges of old models of a very specific charming style, and if we would see new Kislev they would be of a more modern style.
Perhaps not a big problem, but I think if they had dropped brand new kislev lots of people would assume their favourite faction is about to get an update, and rather wait than getting the old models. .

Why would that be a problem for Kislev and not for Bretonnia (or to a lesser extent Khemri) who are getting a handful of new kits in a modern style? Theres certainly a part of me that thinks its foolish of me to throw my cash at the current kits for both factions instead of just waiting it out a couple years to buy the inevitable resculpts, but then I'd basically have to sit on the sidelines until that happened barring the occasional game with my legacy armies.

 Stormonu wrote:
After the return of Genestealer Cults, Sisters and Squats (Votann), never discount GW as never (re)doing something.
It’s looking like this will be a case that all the Old World will return at some point, they’re just dribbling and doling it out between their main moneymakers. When they run out of old stuff to reissue, they’ll likely turn their attention to new forces like Kislev and Cathay - but we’re probably talking 3-5 years at least.

A couple of the legacy factions (vampire counts, DE, Skaven) *were* some of WHFBs big moneymakers. Tomb Kings and Bretonnia were actually the least played and lowest selling range of minis in the game, along with Beastmen and Wood Elves. HE IIRC was the top-selling overall, Empire, Orcs/Goblins, and Warriors of Chaos were towards the upper middle/lower top-end.

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

 Vulcan wrote:

 Tim the Biovore wrote:

 Stormonu wrote:
I broke down and bought the Brettonia set - waiting for it arrive, and was looking over my incomplete High Elf army only to realize that GW discontinued most of the High Elf models (I guess Lumineth replaced them?). Are any of the TOW High Elf minis still sold by GW at this time?

Lumineth are Lumineth, the High Elves were pulled from Cities of Sigmar in stages since 2015, with the last few leaving the most recent Battletome to bring them back in to The Old World. None of them are currently sold at this time, but most should be back once High Elves receive their Arcane Journal, though when that might be is anyone's guess

Lumineth are High Elves that can be copyrighted; that's literally the only difference. The aesthetic is generally the same.
.

 alextroy wrote:
I think the GW copy write protection comes from the strange names (orruks rather than orcs) combine with the very pronounced new esthetics.

Lumineth may be high elves, but they are high elves with a strong elemental bent that is nothing like anyone was producing before. The same can be said for almost any faction in AOS. They take the basic faction from WFB and turn some dial on it from 5 up to 11 to create a unique spin on that faction. This creates models that other produces are unlikely to copy. Additionally, it makes such a copy harder to defend as not being "stolen" from their IP.

There is nothing about either of those that is "more copyrightable". Names are covered by trademarks, not copyright. And them having a different more unique aesthetic doesn't offer any more protection, because you don't own themes/ideas/styles. They own the specific model sculpt itself, not the aesthetic design that it has.

As I'm not a copyright lawyer, I have no idea if this is true or not.

But I'd bet the GW management BELIEVED that to be the case when they made the decision. Of course, hat doesn't make THEM right either...

My Brettonia set just arrived, been sifting through it. I've only glanced through the rulebook, but really feel I could just use my behemoth 8E rulebook and I'm a bit disheartened that at the price of the set, it didn't come with a full "army" book (paperback mini would have been acceptable) instead of just a flier for the enclosed forces.

Still, I expect I'm going to have fun with this, so I'm off to start assembling and then painting ....

 caladancid wrote:

kodos wrote:Link: https://www.warhammer-community.com/2024/02/06/riders-of-the-dead-read-an-exclusive-excerpt-from-this-years-readers-choice-winner/

and foreseeable future can mean anything from 12 months to 12 years

I don't know what to tell you. Words have an agreed on meaning in English.

Overread wrote:GW tend to view the world in 3 month bursts with marketing. They've also been clear that they are getting the existing/previous armies out first. So that will at least mean a good chunk of time before they touch any new armies. That's honestly nothing new and the same info we've had for a while now since they previewed the TK and Brets.

Yes you are correct, it is nothing new, GW to their credit has been very up front lately that they are not doing anything with Kislev. What they aren't being up front about is that the initial stuff was straight up fabrication.

Hell, they're barely doing anything with TOW in its entirety, bar releasing old outdated models


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mentlegen324 wrote:

Mr.Pickels wrote:
It is important to note that GW officals said during the release/hype up for Adeptus Titanicus that there was not going to be an Epic transition. That Epic wouldn't happen/come back, but it did come out about 5 years or so later.

There's nothing stopping GW from doing campaign books that will bring in other factions, like an Elven Civil War which would introduce Dark Elves. Cathay being invaded by Chaos which might pull in Ogre Kingdoms, Chaos Dwarfs, and Cathay. A Lustria book for Skaven and Lizardmen. So much is just possibility right now with GW, time will tell if they can manage the game system along with their other games/IP's.

There's a bit of a difference between something like "That's not planned at the moment" and the "They're not going to be part of this project/game, even as we update the narrative" for TOW.

To be honest, the later can never be true, cause numerous unforeseen things can happens in the future (new blood getting involved in the project, bigger ressources allocations etc). But presently, it seems rather obvious that the safe bet is that Kislev won't happens in the near to medium term (I'd say 5 years at least)