Warhammer Fantasy is Having an Apocalyptic Meltdown

Lodur

New member
May 28, 2014
21
0
0
Warhammer Fantasy is Having an Apocalyptic Meltdown

In fiction and in rules, it looks like Warhammer Fantasy Battles is having an apocalyptic meltdown - here's what's happening and what might happen.

Read Full Article
 

Sixcess

New member
Feb 27, 2010
2,719
0
0
The rumour that 9th would go skirmish has been floating around for the best part of a year, if not longer, so I'd not be surprised if it did turn out to be true. WHFB has been overshadowed by 40K for a long long time now so at this point just about any attempt to revitalise is could get signed off on. Regardless I still think it'll remain the weaker of the two.

Ironically 40K has been going in the other direction with an ever greater emphasis on larger armies, larger vehicles (and more of them) and formations. It would be strange to see WHFB turn into a skirmish game at the same time as 40K is turning into 28mm scale Epic. Still, given the relative selling power of the two IPs such a reversal would make sense.
 

Alleged_Alec

New member
Sep 2, 2008
796
0
0
Gheghe. Why do people believe these rumours? At the very best, this is going to be a new edition of Mordheim. They'd be total idiots for removing one of the more popular armies.
 

cleric of the order

New member
Sep 13, 2010
546
0
0
I haven't seen anything on /tg/ about this so i don't think it's completely on the level but if true, more reason to play mantic's kings of war.
btw, zoats, squats, dogs of war, jean (heh) stealer cults, Good ork army lists, ork flavour, witch hunters, specialist games, kroot mercs, demiurg, pirate and feral ork and eldar armies, Harlequin armies, good pricing and game balance.
list of things gw has killed.
Seems I can add valtan because it was never Karl that was the avatar of SIGMAR, no wonder I'm still waiting for my luthor Huss, valten and luthor were linked in fluff.
That being said at least now i can field my human elf and dwarf army
[edit] and chapter approved[edit]
 

Starke

New member
Mar 6, 2008
3,877
0
0
40k has 7 factions?

1. Marines
2. Guard (and the Ordos units)
3. Orks
4. Eldar
5. Dark Eldar (though they keep trying to feed them into a woodchipper)
6. Chaos (Daemons and Chaos Marines)
7. Tau
8. 'Nids (with gene stealers)
9. Necrons

...maybe Eldar and Dark Eldar should be grouped together? But that one seems weird to me.
 

Starke

New member
Mar 6, 2008
3,877
0
0
cleric of the order said:
...witch hunters... list of things gw has killed.
So that's why Invasion never expanded Witch Hunters into a full on subfaction. :(
 

Rituro

Critwrencha
Sep 18, 2008
151
0
0
Well, now I don't feel bad about selling off 90% of my collection a couple years ago. I enjoyed WHFB because it wasn't the skirmish-style, Yahtzee-with-miniatures game 40k was. If even half these rumours are true, I'd be sad to see what the game has become. Since when has too many factions been a bad thing?
 

Raesvelg

New member
Oct 22, 2008
486
0
0
Starke said:
40k has 7 factions?

1. Marines
2. Guard (and the Ordos units)
3. Orks
4. Eldar
5. Dark Eldar (though they keep trying to feed them into a woodchipper)
6. Chaos (Daemons and Chaos Marines)
7. Tau
8. 'Nids (with gene stealers)
9. Necrons

...maybe Eldar and Dark Eldar should be grouped together? But that one seems weird to me.
1. Forces of the Imperium.
2. Orks
3. Eldar/Dark Eldar (battle brothers and all that)
4. Chaos
5. Tau
6. Tyranids
7. Necrons

Is I assume the seven factions being referred to. Each of those factions has an ever-escalating number of sub-factions, of course, but if you think about them that way it meshes well with the Allies system as it currently stands in 7th.
 

deth2munkies

New member
Jan 28, 2009
1,066
0
0
So what you're saying is that the old Wood Elf army I've had for 15 years is no longer going to be legal, and they're going to use this as an excuse to pump up what is already the single most overpriced hobby franchise in history to even more ludicrous levels.

I'll keep staying away.
 

Starke

New member
Mar 6, 2008
3,877
0
0
deth2munkies said:
So what you're saying is that the old Wood Elf army I've had for 15 years is no longer going to be legal, and they're going to use this as an excuse to pump up what is already the single most overpriced hobby franchise in history to even more ludicrous levels.

I'll keep staying away.
Yup. Basically. It's why I don't even think about getting into the minis anymore, and just keep derping around with the LCGs and video games.
 

Starke

New member
Mar 6, 2008
3,877
0
0
Raesvelg said:
Starke said:
40k has 7 factions?

1. Marines
2. Guard (and the Ordos units)
3. Orks
4. Eldar
5. Dark Eldar (though they keep trying to feed them into a woodchipper)
6. Chaos (Daemons and Chaos Marines)
7. Tau
8. 'Nids (with gene stealers)
9. Necrons

...maybe Eldar and Dark Eldar should be grouped together? But that one seems weird to me.
1. Forces of the Imperium.
2. Orks
3. Eldar/Dark Eldar (battle brothers and all that)
4. Chaos
5. Tau
6. Tyranids
7. Necrons

Is I assume the seven factions being referred to. Each of those factions has an ever-escalating number of sub-factions, of course, but if you think about them that way it meshes well with the Allies system as it currently stands in 7th.
Yeah, but at that point... I get where they're trying to streamline all the Imperium units together, it just doesn't really make sense to me.

I mean even the transition from Guard to Astra Militarum... which I still haven't gotten used to, sort of further illustrates the schism between the Marines and Guardsmen. That said, crap like the Imperial Knights seems to be there just to illustrate more diversity between the Imperium forces, but it still seems weird.

Also Eldar/Dark Eldar sounds so wrong. I get the battle brothers affiliation issue, but that doesn't mean they're the same faction. By that logic Tau and Eldar are the same faction. And, by extension, Grey Knights are seperate from Imperium forces.
 

Starke

New member
Mar 6, 2008
3,877
0
0
cleric of the order said:
Starke said:
cleric of the order said:
...witch hunters... list of things gw has killed.
So that's why Invasion never expanded Witch Hunters into a full on subfaction. :(
I meant ordo hereticus, but yeah that can apply to WHFB.
Wait, they deep sixed the Adeptus Sororitas? Crap.

Xenos was Deathwatch, Maleus was Grey Knights or Daemons... Hereticus was the Sisters of Battle, wasn't it?
 

Karadalis

New member
Apr 26, 2011
1,065
0
0
Starke said:
cleric of the order said:
Starke said:
cleric of the order said:
...witch hunters... list of things gw has killed.
So that's why Invasion never expanded Witch Hunters into a full on subfaction. :(
I meant ordo hereticus, but yeah that can apply to WHFB.
Wait, they deep sixed the Adeptus Sororitas? Crap.

Xenos was Deathwatch, Maleus was Grey Knights or Daemons... Hereticus was the Sisters of Battle, wasn't it?
Yep... but the adeptus soriritas has been getting the shaft for years upon years no... not only in not getting a good codex but also in fluff, they where the punching bags for everyone essentially and have become more or less a joke in the fluff.

They are the redshirts of the warhammer 40k universe when normal imperial guard redshirts arent dramatic enough.

LvL 2 redshirts.
 

Shamanic Rhythm

New member
Dec 6, 2009
1,653
0
0
"You know, the biggest problem with Warhammer is that there are just too many armies to choose between," said no one ever.

Really stupid. So now Elves and Empire/Dwarves will either have billions of models to choose from and balance, or they'll wipe out 50% of existing models and piss off all the players who've kept their old armies for a decade or two.

Games Workshop has really gone full retard lately. This is why I don't waste money on them anymore, and why everyone else I used to play Warhammer with is switching to War Machine.
 

smartalec

New member
Sep 12, 2008
54
0
0
I was lucky enough to speak to a couple of GW developers during the launch period of their Lord of the Rings skirmish game back in early 2002.

One of the prevailing thoughts was 'if we'd known back when we started all that we know now about games design, Warhammer would have used the LotR rules'.
 

Starke

New member
Mar 6, 2008
3,877
0
0
Shamanic Rhythm said:
"You know, the biggest problem with Warhammer is that there are just too many armies to choose between," said no one ever.
I could get it as a barrier for entry, when the models are so expensive that if you accidentally start with the wrong force you could be out a couple grand trying to switch over to a faction you actually like... but I'd hardly fault that on the number of available factions.

Shamanic Rhythm said:
Really stupid. So now Elves and Empire/Dwarves will either have billions of models to choose from and balance, or they'll wipe out 50% of existing models and piss off all the players who've kept their old armies for a decade or two.
Wiping out 50% of existing models is probably the plan. It's why they're doing the whole "stuff getting eaten by the warp" mechanic. So they can flat out snuff anything that annoys them.

Shamanic Rhythm said:
Games Workshop has really gone full retard lately. This is why I don't waste money on them anymore, and why everyone else I used to play Warhammer with is switching to War Machine.
It's even worse if you're sticking to the tie in material. A bunch of the black library stuff has gotten phased out of print... that could be intentional or just standard operating procedure, but it's made actually getting the fluff a lot more tedious.

They've started passing out the license to any developer willing to front some cash, which has taken the franchise from getting solid AAA games to stuff that's borderline shovelware (like Warhammer Quest or that lane defense 40k game).

The thing I'm most irritated with was whoever canned Invasion, though that could have been FFG's call.

Combine that with the uppricing of models and it's just stupid behavior from them across the board. They want to be a luxury brand imprint now... okay, great, cool, but how the hell are they supposed to pay the bills and stay in business while driving everyone out of the market and killing the brand? To say nothing of the part where their tie in PC games have gone the exact opposite route, and run screaming for the bargain bin.
 

The_Darkness

New member
Nov 8, 2010
546
0
0
I think they lost me when they had the Wood Elves join sides with the Dark Elves. Then again, actually, Games Workshop lost me a looong time ago. About the time that White Dwarf became advertising that you paid to receive. I'll just stick to playing with the 6th Ed rules and ignore everything since...
 

cleric of the order

New member
Sep 13, 2010
546
0
0
Starke said:
Wait, they deep sixed the Adeptus Sororitas? Crap.

Xenos was Deathwatch, Maleus was Grey Knights or Daemons... Hereticus was the Sisters of Battle, wasn't it?
yeah the sisters of battle are hereticus or in the old days witch hunters.
as for the scraping, they got a white dwarf codex (bad sign but hey look at the blood angels).
It's a 100 per squad of ten(well, that's harder to bounce back, people order less, less will be made, support destroyed soon.).
Greyknights borrowed half their 'dex (those were some of the better srats in their army, now they are all cult f the emprah all the time)(mirrors wards story about the greyknights that killed sisters of battle for no reason and used their blood to ward off the daemons, ignoring that greyknights already have wards in their own Armour).
No new models.
and now a webstore exclusive(like all the non plastic eldar and orks).
You cannot find them anymore at stores, because of that last part, even if you can they they can't
In summery doomed to be bricked like most none 'dex xenos.
Worse yet they cost less then forge world imperial guard armies model per model, and i wish was joking.
Or hell forge world space marine legions.
I would rather buy a Horus heresy army then buy sisters, admittedly it would be admech ol' cult of robots.

though if anyone does want to try and build an army send them here.
http://1d4chan.org/wiki/Sisters_of_Battle
they have some army lists for 6e and maybe 7e when the fa/tg/uys get off their butts and get shit done.
but as /tg/ has been languishing lately I'm not sure if that will ever happen.
Nice daemonette will likely show up and everyone will go nuts.
 
Jan 12, 2012
2,114
0
0
This was by far the most positive I've seen a person be about these rumours. I've been away from the wargame for a bit (though I was big into WFRP back in the day), but people I know in the community HATE a lot of the proposed stuff.

A lot of the fluff would be/is going down the drain; the idea that all the Elves would work together is like saying that Australian Aborigines, South Sudanese, and Jamaicans should form an alliance because they've all got dark skin, except if the Earth equivalent had been fighting against each other for thousands of years, and one of them was literally a cult of baby-eating sadists. A key theme of Warhammer was that even the good guys were out for their own subset first, and they only narrowly came together time and again against the worst threats before breaking up once more. Lumping them together feels just wrong.

Mechanically, combining the forces is another nightmare of balance. Presumably "Empire Core" would be the starting ground for Dwarves, meaning that one force would have some of the best defensive troops in the game (Dwarves), the best artillery (Dwarves and Empire), some solid magic-users (Empire and Bretonnia) and people who can shut down enemy magic (Dwarves), good large blocks of troops (Empire) and the best cavalry in the game (Bretonnia). As Shamanic points out, they'd either have to flush half the current units down the warp-hole or have a steam roller of an army, with enough options to win any battle handily. I have no idea how a faction of super-soldiers would fit into there.

Honestly, I'm just wondering what happened to Dogs of War; that was a good way to shake up current army lists without stomping all over the canon or throwing the entire balance they've tried to build up since the 80's into a blender.