PDA

View Full Version : "Thought" 9th Ed Box - Bretonnians vs Wood Elves?



Ealdwulf
07-03-2014, 15:18
So the other day I was sitting at my desk thinking (dangerous I know) and it dawned on me...

We have heard extensive rumors that 9th ed is inbound this year, I've heard this from fairly reliable sources but no real details past that.

We also know that Bretonnians and Wood Elves still are in the works and likely due out this year.

What *IF* the two featured forces against each other are Brets vs Wood Elves.

I know what you're thinking, but they're...like good guys...and stuff.

A few fluff reasons I think this box set could work and wouldn't surprise me. Wood Elves and Bretonnians share a close geographic border. They've been known to fight - it wouldn't be a stretch to envision some kind of conflict or battle that would make a good box set.

Anyways it was just the insane musings of a bored dwarf, I doubt it will actually happen but it's fun to think about.

Archon of Death
07-03-2014, 15:29
We also know that Bretonnians and Wood Elves still are in the works and likely due out this year.

Beastmen. Close geographic border to both armies, known bad guys, likely to get a new release before 9th drops (probably the last release, either following Skaven or after Brets/Woodies with Skaven being one of the first armies for 9th).

I wouldn't be surprised if GW did Empire vs O&G, both popular armies, although highly unlikely to make them much in sales (everyone already has those armies). But any of the 3 armies suggested between you and I is unlikely to sell more kits than the 10 of us playing those armies (in GW's eyes), and the 50 people who would rather spend 50$ more on a bunch of bits and a mini-rulebook (assuming they jack up the price to 125).

Ealdwulf
07-03-2014, 15:34
I could totally see Beastmen and Brets, or Beast and Wood Elves.

Like you said, Empire and O&G are the most obvious choice - but both of those armies are just overflowing with updated models that most people already own.

Minty
07-03-2014, 15:46
There hasn't been a good-guys Vs good-guys boxset since the last time the Brets had the job in 4th ed. Bretonnia Vs Lizardmen.

Now - Bretonnia is my main army so I'm biased - but I think Brets are the ideal Force of Order for the job. Other Order factions have much more clout in-universe, but that's not what matters.

You're Little Timmy going into the shop with your birthday money, what's going to appeal to you more? A lot of shoeless guys with moustaches and puffy sleeves, or a host of glorious knights in armour?

Wood Elves would also be a good choice, but Little Timmy probably thinks they're girly.

Beastmen and Greenskins are both solid choices for the other half. Vampires would be an easy sell too (albeit not a good starting army).

Remember the painting on the front of the Island of Blood box? Imagine that with Empire, then with Brets, I know which one I think looks coolest!

baransiege
07-03-2014, 16:02
As others have pointed out in the past Beastmen have far too much similarity to Satanic imagery which in some parts of the world would make the core set a hard sell if they were included.

Unless they radically change the play style of Wood Elves I just don't see them as viable in a starter set either - it's meant to have two armies that are easy to control and representative of Warhammer play in general. Neither of which Wood Elves constitute.

Look at the last set - High Elves weren't redone for ages so there's not necessarily any link between the contents of the starter set and when an army gets redone.

T10
07-03-2014, 16:14
Beastmen.

IMPOSSIBRRU! Beastmen must never get a good army book.

It goes agains all things Warhammer.

-T10

Archon of Death
07-03-2014, 16:15
Last release of 8th edition, anticipating how 9th meta will be? Never said it would be good, it's in the cursed slot.

Charistoph
07-03-2014, 17:33
Still, if you were looking for opposing styles along with opposing Force grouping, Bretonnians vs Beastmen make for an ideal grouping. Ungor Raider pack with a Gor herd lead by a Beast Shaman supported by some Minotaurs facing off against some Longbowmen, Knights, and a pack of Men @ Arms. It would work well, I think.

The people who worry about Satanic imagery in the Beastmen are usually too far in to their own religion's traditions (and not facts) to be playing Warhammer in the first place. After all, it has MAGIC!!!

Lastavenger
07-03-2014, 18:47
I could see Bretonnia vs Beastmen. It can be doable, if GW don't show too much "satanic" imagery on cover. Imagine Quest themed starter.
For brets:
10 battle pilglims
5 Questing knights
1 Damsel on horse
1 Lord (questing vow) on pegasus/ hippogryph
For goat legged fellas:
1 shaman
1 Doombull
2 Minotaurs
5 Centigors
20 gors

I would buy 3 kits on release day.

Minty
07-03-2014, 20:15
I think those lists are a bit iffy. They mostly like to include all stages of the game and something approaching distinctly different lists.

Yours has cavalry on both sides and no shooting. It also has far fewer minis than Island of Blood. In fact, your kit has fewer models than Island of Blood has Clanrats!


Bretonnia:

1 Damsel on Warhorse
1 Paladin on Pegasus
8 Knights of the Realm (Lance of nine with Damsel)
10 bowmen+Stakes
10 Skirmishing Bowmen
Maybe 5 Questing Knights?

Beastmen:

1 shaman
1 Doombull
2 Minotaurs
10 Bestigors w/ Great Weapons.
20 gors
Maybe 5 Harpies?

I have bought a couple of Islands of Blood in my time and I admit, even now that that box left me speechless. The number and quality of the minis was breathtaking and I'd believe almost anything is possible for the next kit.

iamjack42
07-03-2014, 21:06
I fully anticipate that we will see Vampire Counts (with new zombies and Blood Knights) in the starter. Probably facing Empire.

tezdal
07-03-2014, 21:59
There hasn't been a good-guys Vs good-guys boxset since the last time the Brets had the job in 4th ed. Bretonnia Vs Lizardmen.

Now - Bretonnia is my main army so I'm biased - but I think Brets are the ideal Force of Order for the job. Other Order factions have much more clout in-universe, but that's not what matters.

You're Little Timmy going into the shop with your birthday money, what's going to appeal to you more? A lot of shoeless guys with moustaches and puffy sleeves, or a host of glorious knights in armour?

Wood Elves would also be a good choice, but Little Timmy probably thinks they're girly.

Beastmen and Greenskins are both solid choices for the other half. Vampires would be an easy sell too (albeit not a good starting army).

Remember the painting on the front of the Island of Blood box? Imagine that with Empire, then with Brets, I know which one I think looks coolest!

That was 5th edition.

Archon of Death
07-03-2014, 22:51
VC or Beastmen and Brets would make me purchase tons of starter sets as those 3 are my favorite armies.

But just to be contrary, GW should put Chaos Dwarfs in the starter set XD

Lord Dan
08-03-2014, 01:18
Last release of 8th edition, anticipating how 9th meta will be? Never said it would be good, it's in the cursed slot.
It's funny you mention that, because weren't Beastmen the last release of 7th edition?



The people who worry about Satanic imagery in the Beastmen are usually too far in to their own religion's traditions (and not facts) to be playing Warhammer in the first place. After all, it has MAGIC!!!
I have to agree. I actually consider myself a pretty religious guy, and even I was confused by the notion that Beastmen = Satanism. "OH MY GOSH, IT HAS A GOAT HEAD!!!! JUST LIKE SATAN!!!" *facepalm*

Hragnar Goreskull
08-03-2014, 01:58
Maybe, just maybe ,with the idea floating around that allies are going to be a regular part of the game: Why couldn't we have Brets and WE's against a Beastmen force? Some knights backed up by some WE archers against some kinda Beastmen horde? Just a thought but most likely 9th will be such a radical change they wont have big units anymore IMO. Would be cool 3 armies in a box tho :)

#hailsatan

BigbyWolf
08-03-2014, 02:04
I reckon there's a very good chance they'd go back to Greenskins as the "bad" army, and pitting them against Bretts would be quite fitting.

Lord Dan
08-03-2014, 02:41
Can't we just have a nice, simple, WoC vs. Empire box set?

Archon of Death
08-03-2014, 02:59
Nurgle WoC vs Knight, Demigryph, cannon, Light Counsel Empire. It would be great. In fact, remove all other armies, just keep WoC and Empire.

Lord Dan
08-03-2014, 03:05
Exactly.

More seriously, it would give them an opportunity to redo the Empire State Troops, Empire Knights, and Chaos Marauders in one fell swoop.

Archon of Death
08-03-2014, 03:16
Oh. That is actually a really good reason to do the two of them. I thought you were just going off popular armies.

Charistoph
08-03-2014, 03:27
Actually, redoing models that need it, would be the worst reason I would want them included. GW has a tendency to say, "well you have them in the starter, you don't need a boxed version", though the Hellbrutes put a small lie in that statement.

Lastavenger
08-03-2014, 07:21
Yours has cavalry on both sides and no shooting. Centigors have throwing axes. Once I charged Wyssaned unit of 5 centigors and they killed 4 knights (3 shooting, 1 combat). After that I have something that resembles respect for them.


It also has far fewer minis than Island of Blood. In fact, your kit has fewer models than Island of Blood has Clanrats!But have more bigger and beefier models. Gors are bigger than clanrats, battle pilgrims are broader/wider than elves. GW will produce kit with similar amount of sprues to previous kit. That said, I should increase numbers of pilgrims to 15 or knights to 7/8.


To be honest any of less popular armies would be great. If I'm not mistaken, being in edition starter helped skaven see tables more often. Add some new kits and you have pretty well revamped army.

sasheep
08-03-2014, 09:43
I would love Brets vs Vampires. You could cover all phases of the game and have a good variety of troop types.

Bretonnia:

1 Damsel on Warhorse
1 Paladin on Pegasus
8 Knights of the Realm (Lance of nine with Damsel)
10 bowmen+Stakes
10 Skirmishing Bowmen
Maybe 5 Questing Knights?

Maybe add some battle pilgrims instead of the Questing knights?

Vampires:

Vampire
Wight king bsb
Necromancer
40 Zombies
30 Skeletons
5 Blood knights
Varghulf/3 vargheists

Kakapo42
08-03-2014, 10:05
I'd personally go with Bretonnia vs. Beastmen myself. It'd lend itself to a nice quick fun narrative about a Bretonnian noble and some Knights Errant, along with a few of their peasant rabble, going off on a quest to rescue a lovely Damsel from the Beastmen. Then by the end of it if the Knights have survived and won they become fully fledged Knights of the Realm, just as the two players are now fully fledged tabletop hobbyists.

Lorm
08-03-2014, 10:20
I hope they release Bretonnia as soon as possible, first because they deserve it and second so people would stop to put them in every fantasy future release...
Gw is now putting the two most popular armies in the starter, it has logic since the starter set is made not to sell less popular armies, but to make people actually start playing and also to sell it to veterans who like the miniatures in it; that said i'd like to see some variety in starters, different armies (even though i play empire and i hoped for a starter with WoC and Empire, simply because it would be awesome both for the fluff and for miniatures)
Couldn't they make a couple of different starters? Two different boxes with a total of 4 completely different armies (2 armies each box as usual), that would offer much more choice, both to newbies and veterans, and sell pretty good too (if done right and with right units/armies)

Kakapo42
08-03-2014, 10:32
Couldn't they make a couple of different starters? Two different boxes with a total of 4 completely different armies (2 armies each box as usual), that would offer much more choice, both to newbies and veterans, and sell pretty good too (if done right and with right units/armies)

In fairness I'd prefer they did away with a single starter box entirely and instead have a series of faction-specific starter boxes, essentially a battalion set with a couple of characters (one general and maybe a wizard), a miniature rulebook, some templates, whippy-sticks, a few dice and some other gubbins thrown in. That way people would have total freedom to pick and choose which faction to start with.

baransiege
08-03-2014, 11:39
I have to agree. I actually consider myself a pretty religious guy, and even I was confused by the notion that Beastmen = Satanism. "OH MY GOSH, IT HAS A GOAT HEAD!!!! JUST LIKE SATAN!!!" *facepalm*



The people who worry about Satanic imagery in the Beastmen are usually too far in to their own religion's traditions (and not facts) to be playing Warhammer in the first place. After all, it has MAGIC!!!

Last time this discussion came up a couple of store owners piped in on the issue. One in particular made a very strong point - he said that his biggest sales of the Starter set were to parents to buy for their kids - not people buying for themselves.

I think he was USA based, but the point still stands that in Christian countries - demonic warped goat men have certain connotations.

He said that there had been plenty of cases where he had had to argue parents around the bad public image these games have outside the hobby in order to convince them it wouldn't be a bad influence on their children. He said having Beastmen in there would have been a deal breaker - O+G and Skaven are bad guys sure but he could spin them in a comedic way which helps sell to parents. If that's what a shopkeeper thinks who has years of experience selling these things I'm going to listen to him.

[I have a Beastmen army btw]

Minty
08-03-2014, 14:00
:)
Maybe, just maybe ,with the idea floating around that allies are going to be a regular part of the game: Why couldn't we have Brets and WE's against a Beastmen force? Some knights backed up by some WE archers against some kinda Beastmen horde? Just a thought but most likely 9th will be such a radical change they wont have big units anymore IMO. Would be cool 3 armies in a box tho


In fairness I'd prefer they did away with a single starter box entirely and instead have a series of faction-specific starter boxes, essentially a battalion set with a couple of characters (one general and maybe a wizard), a miniature rulebook, some templates, whippy-sticks, a few dice and some other gubbins thrown in. That way people would have total freedom to pick and choose which faction to start with.

I promise you, I guarantee you that there will not be allied armies in the starter kit.

I had 56 Island of Blood Swordmasters in my High Elf army. A mate of mine built a whole Dark Angels army from Black Reach Terminators. I bet no-one's bought a propper Ork Deffkopta since Black Reach either, or Space Marine Bikes since Dark Vengeance.

Whatever models are in the starter kit cannibalise sales from their non-starter versions. GW makes far more money from the non-starter models.

The damage is limited to two armies per edition, though.

Including three armies in a starter kit will only cost GW more money as people stop buying Glade Guard or whatever, in addition to Knights and Gors (or whatever).




More seriously, it would give them an opportunity to redo the Empire State Troops, Empire Knights, and Chaos Marauders in one fell swoop.

For the same reason, GW do not view the starter kit as a chance to redo - to update - a kit. They don't want you to build an army out of cheap-on-ebay starter-kit models, they want you to buy ten-for-30 multipose plastics.



What GW do intend with the starter kit is to get Little Timmy (or his mum) to spend some money on more models over the next six to twelve months.

Ideally, someone who doesn't play Warhammer sees the kit and thinks it looks cool and has a lot of minis for the price. He buys it and then buys an army book and a couple of boxes of minis a little later on. After that, the box has done its job.


To do that job, the box needs to look awesome on the shelf - I think Bretonnian Knights can do that better than any other force of Order.

It also needs a good number of fantastic minis - Island of Blood did that job, I cannot see the new kit being any less stellar. Again, bretonnian Knights are a solid choice here - GW can sculpt a lance of snap-fit knights that would make you weep to look upon them.

Finally - and this is what people are getting at when they talk about the rest of the line - the starter box needs to make people want more minis to bulk out their new army. Right now, Bretonnia is a weak link for this step. ancient army book and most of the minis are unavailable to buy.


If Bretonnia gets an update soon, it will check all the boxes, though.


If not - I still think Brets would appeal to Little Timmy far more than Empire ever would in terms of a box sitting on the shelf with a painting on the front.

Charistoph
08-03-2014, 14:42
Last time this discussion came up a couple of store owners piped in on the issue. One in particular made a very strong point - he said that his biggest sales of the Starter set were to parents to buy for their kids - not people buying for themselves.

I think he was USA based, but the point still stands that in Christian countries - demonic warped goat men have certain connotations.

He said that there had been plenty of cases where he had had to argue parents around the bad public image these games have outside the hobby in order to convince them it wouldn't be a bad influence on their children. He said having Beastmen in there would have been a deal breaker - O+G and Skaven are bad guys sure but he could spin them in a comedic way which helps sell to parents. If that's what a shopkeeper thinks who has years of experience selling these things I'm going to listen to him.

Oh, I know all that. The funny part is that there is nothing in the Bible that connects that imagery with the devil. That's all stuff added much much later. If anything, the Lizardmen have more associated with the Serpent/Dragon which Satan IS linked to than the goats of the Beastmen.

But then, many Christians, especially in Europe and the American South, follow traditions more than scripture, anyway, which makes this argument much like a cow's opinion.

Acephale
08-03-2014, 15:56
To appease all the devout Christians out there, GW should totally do a Righteous version of Warhammer (Godhammer? Jesushammer?), where the armies of God battle the armies of Satan. God's army has to be insanely OP of course, and Satan's book will be really gimped and never get any updates. Also, God gets all the cool models. That way, religious people will not be offended and that's the only real concern here, right?

On a serious note, rumors have it that 9th will be a real shakeup so I'm expecting Tomb Kings vs Chaos Dwarfs for the starter box!

SSquirrel
08-03-2014, 16:28
Warriors of chaos or dark elves would both make great armies for the Chaos side of things. The new DElves look amazing and it's a very flexible army. WoC is super popular and except for almost non-existent shooting has a decent bit of flexibility in units, even if the basic idea is rush forward and slaughter :) Dwarfs are one of the classic armies for Warhammer. Lizardmen have tons of dinosaurs. U can make a good case for almost any army

I fully expect every army will be gaining sets like the Warhost of Naggaroth or the Dwarven Battleline in 9th. Have a starter w 2 armies butt hen also have something in the $150-$175 range that gives a decent ~1k starting force. I know some of the battalions already do that, like Ogres, but some don't. Skaven for example


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Lord Dan
08-03-2014, 17:02
For the same reason, GW do not view the starter kit as a chance to redo - to update - a kit. They don't want you to build an army out of cheap-on-ebay starter-kit models, they want you to buy ten-for-30 multipose plastics.


Except that's exactly what they've done with every starter kit they've put out? I made almost my entire Skaven army out of those ~50 cent IoB Clanrats. :D

EmperorNorton
08-03-2014, 18:10
Brets v. Wood Elves was my guess for the 8th Edition box set. Made sense then, makes even more sense now.
I'd buy it. Roughly eighteen times.

Odin
08-03-2014, 20:08
The reliable rumour mongers are saying the next edition of 40k is this year, which makes 9th edition Warhammer considerably less likely this year.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

leopard
08-03-2014, 22:11
Expecting allies, if its part of the game you will get it in the box. Actually reduces the cannibalisation of main unit sales, as the two main factions will likely only have one decent unit each and the rest of the models will look nice but not be stuff you want too many of - best way to hurt the bitz people is to have half the box stuff the people who buy bitz don't want.

Expect something where you have two small armies, and each gets a single allied unit, a small one, just to show the concept - possibly of models currently in metal/resin they are wanting to stop doing but won't sell enough to be worth doing as a separate box - starter set is the ideal home for them.

Then add a couple of models players will want multiples of and they have a reasonable chance to shift individual boxes to new players and perhaps two copies to veterans (who also want more than one rulebook for when one falls apart).

No idea what factions will be in the box but expect one to be a 'horde' type army and one to be a smaller more elite one, seems to fit the last two starter sets.

Would love for individual army sets, but thats something other companies do so can't see it myself.

Charistoph
09-03-2014, 01:39
Expecting allies, if its part of the game you will get it in the box.

Yes, I really like the Bloodletters and Guard Veterans in the Dark Vengeance kit. They are absolutely amazing. :wtf:

It would be smart, but there are a lot of smart things that GW misses out on doing.

leopard
11-03-2014, 00:04
WHFB tends to have enough models in the box though to pull allies off in a way 40k may struggle with.

Take IoB, rats have two blocks of rodents and the rat ogres, plus two characters. Pointies have two units and two characters, would not be hard for the rats to swap on unit and one character out for a small allied force. pic a generic human looking army and it could easily be on either side and used as such in whatever starter scenarios are in there.

DV doesn't really have enough models in the box to add allies without in effect ending up with four tiny armies in there so not strictly comparable, swap the marines out for something else though (IG say) and it becomes easy to add a combat squad and a captain to that side, Orks could easily get a small unit of IG veterans as allies. The chaos side could almost have allies now, use the cultists as IG infantry and just run with it.

Odin
11-03-2014, 12:43
The starter set armies are small enough already, without watering them down further with allies. Can't see any good reason for doing this.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

CountUlrich
11-03-2014, 13:49
The starter set armies are small enough already, without watering them down further with allies. Can't see any good reason for doing this.

This

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk

Urgat
11-03-2014, 15:14
I have to agree. I actually consider myself a pretty religious guy, and even I was confused by the notion that Beastmen = Satanism. "OH MY GOSH, IT HAS A GOAT HEAD!!!! JUST LIKE SATAN!!!" *facepalm*
I don't know, I heard Doom and Diablo had been massive fails because of the demonic imagery.

leopard
11-03-2014, 20:13
The starter set armies are small enough already, without watering them down further with allies. Can't see any good reason for doing this.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

When has needing a good reason mattered?

Depends what GW want to do, having two armies in the box and a small single third faction unit could work, especially if they want a more story telling feel - almost two armies and a third faction being a character and a few henchmen.

Odin
11-03-2014, 21:06
When has needing a good reason mattered?

Depends what GW want to do, having two armies in the box and a small single third faction unit could work, especially if they want a more story telling feel - almost two armies and a third faction being a character and a few henchmen.

The starter set sells because it provides a cheap bunch of minis to form the core of a new army or boost an existing one. You can split it with a friend or sell off half the models on eBay. The high elves were only barely enough to serve this purpose, and even the Skaven don't get you very far.

Spread it out any more and I just can't see the appeal. Buy a boxed set in order to get your hands on a couple of units and sell off most of the minis on eBay? Hardly a compelling offer. Find two or three friends all of whom want to start the various armies in the box, and can agree on who gets which ones? Considerably less likely than splitting the set with one friend.

GW would be crazy to do it. Unfortunately, they are.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

leopard
11-03-2014, 21:08
But who says they want the starter set to be an easy and cheap source of core models for armies, a few adjustments and it becomes something you want, but not something you want two of, its something you get them move to the normal product line.

Archon of Death
11-03-2014, 21:52
I, personally, want the core set to be an easy and cheap source of minis. If I don't want to buy 2 of something from GW, I won't want to buy 1.

leopard
11-03-2014, 22:15
Oh fully agree, I want it to be a nice way to get the core units for an army in a way that is both cost effective but also easy to assemble reasonably quickly.

Archon of Death
11-03-2014, 22:56
Yes, it should be snap together style, where things are in as few pieces as possible. Then the models will make good rank filler, starter armies, etc. It cuts GW's costs down for production, keeping the minis cheaper and allowing those two armies to be started out for minimal cost (probably 120-150, but if they stuck to 100 I'd be stoked).