PDA

View Full Version : When will the Age of Sigmar come to 40K?



Avian
30-06-2015, 21:30
Those of you following what's going on in the Fantasy section at the moment will probably be aware that there is a new version of the game coming. Well, the rules leaked onto the Interwebz today and it's essentially 40K Lite. Models have a movement rate, like in FB, but other than that it's essentially a simplified 40K.

It's also four pages long.

Now, if you made up new unit cards for the existing 40K units, you could actually port the system over with no trouble.

Presumably, this is going to move over to 40K as well. The only question is when.

Incidentally, next year 7th edition will be as old as 6th edition was when it got replaced.

MiyamatoMusashi
30-06-2015, 21:53
If only there were an option for "depends if Age of Sigmar succeeds". GW can risk that kind of change with Warhammer because what's the worst that happens if it fails? They'll only do it for 40K if they have proof that it can succeed.

Aluinn
30-06-2015, 22:09
The whole purpose of Age of Sigmar seems to be (rules-wise, at least) to bring Fantasy closer to 40K, from what little we know so far (although I admit it also looks a bit like the LotR rules, which, IMO, are in fact pretty good). Thus, I can't really see anything like that happening to 40K, because it just isn't necessary.

As far as advancing the storyline, pretty much the same principle applies: Age of Sigmar seems to about diversifying the setting and justifying encounters between all the armies in Fantasy. 40K already has that setup via the concept of Warp travel and the sheer expansiveness and diversity of the setting, so, again, not necessary and I doubt it will be done.

jeffersonian000
30-06-2015, 23:35
Age of Sigmar is GW's starting point for 8th Edition 40k, which will integrate both settings into a single rules system in an attempt to regain lost market share. The failure in this is that it's too little, too late. The models are gorgeous, though.

SJ



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Spiney Norman
01-07-2015, 00:11
If only there were an option for "depends if Age of Sigmar succeeds". GW can risk that kind of change with Warhammer because what's the worst that happens if it fails? They'll only do it for 40K if they have proof that it can succeed.

I hope so, because I'm fairly the removal of points values or any other kind balancing mechanism will make the game pretty hard to stomach for anyone over the age of 10 (and that's being generous). The mechanics look workable, but the impossibility of creating balanced armies totally wrecks any chance of me wanting to invest actual money in it.

Drakkar du Chaos
01-07-2015, 00:44
Depends of AoS results. Its plausible it happens and its also plausible it fail and 40K become the only wargame for GW.

Anyway if AoS is a HUGE success, GW will change 40K in an heartbeat, that's for sure.

Voss
01-07-2015, 00:51
Next year. Harry has hinted at developments that will rile up 40k players, and frankly, I don't expect 7th to last any longer than 6th.

40K end times guesswork: the imperium goes boom, Ultramarines primarch wakes up, proclaims his own bastion of human civilization; Warhammer 40K: the Age of Roboute begins!
With Lemon Rush making his own mini-empire on the other side of the galaxy, complete with Fenrisians, wolves and ponies. Rending ponies.

Sadly, while AoS seems a complete disaster in the making for fantasy, with 7th edition 40K, I can only see it as an improvement. And 40k already has key features like formations and junk, plus spin off army parallels like Khorne Daemonkin/Khorne Gorewhatevers.

Mawduce
01-07-2015, 08:36
Next year. Harry has hinted at developments that will rile up 40k players, and frankly, I don't expect 7th to last any longer than 6th.

40K end times guesswork: the imperium goes boom, Ultramarines primarch wakes up, proclaims his own bastion of human civilization; Warhammer 40K: the Age of Roboute begins!
With Lemon Rush making his own mini-empire on the other side of the galaxy, complete with Fenrisians, wolves and ponies. Rending ponies.

Sadly, while AoS seems a complete disaster in the making for fantasy, with 7th edition 40K, I can only see it as an improvement. And 40k already has key features like formations and junk, plus spin off army parallels like Khorne Daemonkin/Khorne Gorewhatevers.

I could see that failing just as hard as Age of Sigmarines. Have you seen these rules. They're terrible. Mordheim is a better entry into Warhammer Fantasy as Necromunda or Kill Team is a better entry into 40k.

Flipmode
01-07-2015, 08:47
I don't feel like it is consciously closer to 40k. 40k has already been through a change/simplification cycle and rebuilt the complexity. They can operate as two independent systems.

Agree that if AoS is a huge success they may feel the pressure to re-simplify 40k in the same mould. Don't see it happening though.

WarsmithGarathor94
01-07-2015, 09:32
I hope it isnt

Anteater
01-07-2015, 09:57
My GW manager says that in a few years they will definetly do a WH40K End Times.

Karhedron
01-07-2015, 14:43
My GW manager says that in a few years they will definetly do a WH40K End Times.

In my experience GW managers are rarely informed of anything that significant so far in advance.

The Age of Sigmar reboot came about because of poor Fantasy sales for various reasons. While sales of 40K remain good, I cannot see any obvious reason for 40K to undergo a similar reboot. I know 40K sales are much better than Fantasy but I don't know how they have changed over time and whether 40K has lost sales overall to other (non-GW) systems.

That they have lost market share is undeniable but that is only a problem if overall sales fall.

Lord_Crull
01-07-2015, 15:16
If 7th Edition is replaced in so quick a time by a new ruleset, then I will be quite irate. I'm fine with paying for new rules every four or five years but not one or two. If 40k get's an End Times event to the setting than that would finally kill the game at my local area, which has been steadily dwindling over the past couple of years in favor of Warmahordes. The End Times outcome pretty much killed Fantasy at my local area.

But I really can't see them doing that kind of hard reboot for 40k, especially since 40k is the one system that usually makes far more profits than Fantasy.

Lord Damocles
01-07-2015, 16:03
My GW manager says that in a few years they will definetly do a WH40K End Times.
I remember when the Eye of Terror campaign was going to be the 40K End Times too!

Charistoph
01-07-2015, 16:13
In a way, they are already doing this.

Think about it. How will armies be setup in AoS? Battle Scrolls. What is the organization push in 40K? Formations and umbrella FOC detachments.

Everything else is just paperwork.

Commandojimbob
01-07-2015, 16:37
I think an "End of Times" for 40k is inevitable, the story line needs progressing and the fall of the Golden Throne is the most logical next step in my mind. However, I don't believe GW will need to be as dramatic with 40k as they are with fantasy because 40k by contrast is much more successful. Having played all editions I still maintain that 7th is the best yet and so there is no need to be dramatic on the gaming mechanics, but to freshen the entire setting and all armies.... yes and "End of Times" event for 40k could and would do that.

lordbeefy
01-07-2015, 16:59
End times 40k has been hinted at for a while, with references in the big rule book and the mechanicus books among others as to the golden throne failing and i am very hopeful that it does indeed come to fruition. From a business perspective the only thing that holds gw back from it is whether they think the current format has run its course. The fantasy situation is heavily driven i think by the fact that the game was heavily on the decline.....until 40k is in the same place it will be only hinted at.

Emperor Karl Franz
01-07-2015, 21:58
Never, I hope.

insectum7
01-07-2015, 22:48
By the numbers, it makes sense to diversify their product lines into two games that are scaled very differently, as opposed to having two competing products over similar game sizes.

I don't think there would be a good financial reason to reset 40K to skirmish level games. It would make sense to build out skirmish level rules with Fantasy, and then roll them out to create an easier "entry level" game to kick start 40K miniature collections. I think as long as there's a strong culture revolving around larger tournament-size 40K games there's not a good reason to throw it away.

Spell_of_Destruction
02-07-2015, 01:24
I'm not so sure that this would ever happen.

The 40k universe is incredibly valuable IP for GW. With all due respect to the outgoing WHFB setting, it was always a largely traditional Tolkein derived fantasy setting (ironically a big part of what made the 40k setting so unique was the direct importation of fantasy archetypes into a sci-fi setting). My first impression is that they are trying to start afresh with their fantasy IP with a view to mimicking the successes of the 40k setting.

I just don't see the same business rationale for them to shake up 40k in the same way and it would be a huge risk to tear apart their existing IP and start afresh.

ehlijen
02-07-2015, 01:32
It does make sense to have multiple games at different scopes, but despite that mordheim and necromunda were cancelled.

I would think it's just as fine to have similar games in different genres (scif and fantasy aesthetics, however much the genres can overlap, each have fans they don't share with the other). I'm not sure having a fantasy game at one scope level and a scifi game at the other is going to give them full coverage of their old playerbase.

Smooth Boy
03-07-2015, 05:22
If only there were an option for "depends if Age of Sigmar succeeds".

Yeah this is basically it. They're taking a slight risk that may pay off (I can see it going the way of Dreadfleet personally). If it works I can see elements bleeding over. 40K's the golden goose at the moment so I can't see them taking undue risks, and if 40K is ever in the position that Fantasy was in then GW's basically going under.

Karhedron
03-07-2015, 10:44
I gather that Fantasy was down to about 15% of GW's profits so it was clear something radical was needed. 40K is still selling well so hopefully there is no need for a major overhaul.

Voss
04-07-2015, 03:29
If only there were an option for "depends if Age of Sigmar succeeds".

I honestly don't think it matters. I just want to go on record for all 40k players out there:

You. Were. Warned.

Althenian Armourlost
04-07-2015, 04:08
The 40k universe is already having it's IP reset. This is why we have Adeptus Astartes and Astra Militarium. (wow, typing that with autocorrect on was difficult. I guess that is the proof that GW finally beats chapterhouse?)

Something on the scale of Age of Sigmar is what was needed to make warhammer completely IP-compatible. 40k was far closer, and is now pretty IP-watertight. Does anyone know any remaining large holes in GWs IP in 40k now?

Okuto
04-07-2015, 04:39
I thought AoS was to rube some of the 40k kool aid on fantasy......

I dont see a huge change to 40k like fantasy, not like 40k is struggling

I do want ends time though.....would like to see 40k progress at least post-13th black crusade

AngryAngel
04-07-2015, 06:19
I'm kind of hoping AoS is a creation of Freddy and I'll wake up..why can't I wake up..:eek:

Sandalphon
04-07-2015, 07:35
40k was far closer, and is now pretty IP-watertight. Does anyone know any remaining large holes in GWs IP in 40k now?

Besides the part where GW's "IP" is largely built upon the backs of taking most things that where "geek cool" from the late 70s to early/mid 80's then putting it in a blender and hitting purée?

At the hometown level for me, GW isn't "down" but -DEAD- Looked in the most local shops and everyone has moved on to other games and systems.
Shocking since a few short years ago there was gaming any time. I asked some players what caused the shift, "price" was the most frequent reply followed shortly by "not enough fun for too much time."
X-wing seems the big draw locally now, I'd hope whatever GW does they do something radical. The cynic in me thinks that's completely unlikely.

Dkoz
04-07-2015, 12:19
WF was really failing that's why GW tried something as drastic as AoS, the only way I foresee a move like this coming to WH40k is if Sigmar is a huge success and 40K sales fall way behind.

Bloodrite
04-07-2015, 15:03
I don't think it's that easy.

Warhammer 40K is becoming way to big in points and models to just revert back to a small skirmish game. And gargantuan creatures/superheavy vehicles (eleven barrels of hell anyone?) would need drastic changes if you want to have the game last for more than one turn.

It looks to me that they want to create a new smaller game that's easy to update and is smaller to maintain.

As long as 40K is their main source of income, I don't think they'll make any big changes to the formula.

Or they just ****** it all up and make everyone mad/sad/tired.

This is GW after all.

Scribe of Khorne
04-07-2015, 15:38
I voted never, but I suppose thats not right.

1. AoS would have to be a smashing success, looking at the 'game' I dont think it will be. My group is pretty much in stunned silence. "How do I even build a list? WTF is this?"
2. 40K would have to tank, hard. I dont think this is going to happen either.
3. FW would have to tank. I personally think there is a loop here between HH and 40K that increases the success of both.

GW could do it, but I really just do not wish to believe there is a reason, need, or upside, to doing so. If they did, they would be unprofitable inside a year. (They are already pretty much there anyway arent they?)

Dryaktylus
04-07-2015, 16:10
I honestly don't think it matters. I just want to go on record for all 40k players out there:

You. Were. Warned.

I see. To the Mail Order!

shin'keiro
04-07-2015, 19:53
The rules for AoS are obviously aimed at the child community, which is fair enough, but I think 40k has a far more adult following anyway. With GW prices as they are, if they lost most of their adult sales, little Jonny would have to rely on Grandma to buy his toys on Birthdays and Christmas, so sales would plummet.

Remember though - you DON'T have to play a new rule set if it happens, you can just continue with 7th edition.

TheFang
04-07-2015, 20:36
I just don't see the same business rationale for them to shake up 40k in the same way and it would be a huge risk to tear apart their existing IP and start afresh.

Anything risking killing the Heresy and 40k cash cow would be insane. The AoS shake up doesn't bode well as a mark of common sense but unless it's a huge success there'll be no impetus to stuff up 40k in the same manner.

tmod
04-07-2015, 20:40
40k IS in fact tanking, and has been for several years. Fantasy and 40k have both had declining revenue for several years and at an about equal rate. The trouble is with Fantasy was that it was so much smaller from the outset, and it neared a tipping point where it would completely collapse. 40k is still a long way from this point, but unless the number of players increase over the next 5-10 years they'll probably do something of a similar nature here. Five years ago nobody would have believed Fantasy was to be binned...

Basically there are to kinds of businesses in the long run: those that are growing and those that are dying. Forgeworld, Black Library, hobby supplies and licenses (the growing parts of GW) cannot sustain the company alone in the long run...

Sent fra min GT-I9506 via Tapatalk

Lord_Crull
04-07-2015, 20:40
Well I just read the new rules and PDF's on the GW website. If 40k becomes like that, then I will really have no interest in it anymore. There seems to be no lack of game balance or army construction at all. I don't have any interest in Age of Sigmar and I have no intention of playing it.

I understand the rumors but I have a hard time believing that GW will replace 40k as such. We might see some aspects of AoS incorporated into the next edition but I have a hard time seeing a complete reboot. Didn't the Space Marine range alone outsell the entire Fantasy range once? It seems unwise to mess with their cash cow in that way. Maybe if Age of Sigmar proved to be a massive unprecedented success I can see it, but that seems to be unlikely. There's also Forgeworld to consider with what they are currently doing with the Horus Heresy range.

sunborn
04-07-2015, 22:29
Anything risking killing the Heresy and 40k cash cow would be insane. The AoS shake up doesn't bode well as a mark of common sense but unless it's a huge success there'll be no impetus to stuff up 40k in the same manner.

This is the right answer, IMHO. GW is run by ***** MBAs in silks suits as much as the next company. This makes them predictable. You milk your cash cows and kill off your dogs. What has to happen is to get the excitement back into the average gamer so that new players come in. The point about the growing company vs the dying one is an oversimplification. The 40k IP is valuable, if GW can't manage it properly, there are a lot of companies that would want to take a run at it by buying it up at firesale prices if Gee-dub goes down.

AngryAngel
04-07-2015, 22:34
It isn't lack of excitement that kills the game, it is over inflated prices kill the new blood on the vine and poor balance/rules kill the vets. Simple as that, it has been declining and despite their best efforts, unless they look to these problems, age of the emperor will happen. Time will tell.

Charistoph
04-07-2015, 22:41
Well I just read the new rules and PDF's on the GW website. If 40k becomes like that, then I will really have no interest in it anymore. There seems to be no lack of game balance or army construction at all. I don't have any interest in Age of Sigmar and I have no intention of playing it.

Personally, I find parts of it rather refreshing, and would definitely think that it would add some interesting things to the game to incorporate some of them.

For example, what if Blood Angel units had to shout, "For the Emperorah!" in order to gain Furious Charge? Or you can say, "Your soul is MINE!" when using Sacrifice or Possession to gain a +1 bonus to the casting?

And the thought of getting a few guys drunk and then playing the game with those types of characters would be YouTube worthy.

However, if you look at Age of Sigmar as a one-fingered salute and troll for overly-competitive players who take these games way to seriously, than I would agree with you, and then laugh while the Empire player talks to the imaginary horse he's pretending to ride so his Hero can reroll To-Hit and To-Wound.

tmod
05-07-2015, 00:40
This is the right answer, IMHO. GW is run by ***** MBAs in silks suits as much as the next company. This makes them predictable. You milk your cash cows and kill off your dogs. What has to happen is to get the excitement back into the average gamer so that new players come in. The point about the growing company vs the dying one is an oversimplification. The 40k IP is valuable, if GW can't manage it properly, there are a lot of companies that would want to take a run at it by buying it up at firesale prices if Gee-dub goes down.

Six months ago Fantasy's IP was valuable as well. I'm sure lots of companies would buy WHFB given the chance, of course 40k would be the same. What killed Fantasy was not that it became unprofitable, what killed it was that GW preferred to "fix it" before it would return a loss. The threat to 40k is that GW might try to "save" 40k the same way they "saved" fantasy. If so, the clock is ticking fast for the long term survival of that game as well: the longer a fast declining GW is surviving post 40k, the lower the probability 40k vets can keep Oldhammer 40k alive long enough to outlive GW and allow another company to buy up and save the brand. Similarly, GW will never allow a competitor to take over Fantasy as long as they have a fantasy line going/are not bankrupt... This is the risk, hard to say how realistic the threat to 40k is at the moment, but fans should hope AOS tanks as hard and fast as possible...

Sent fra min GT-I9506 via Tapatalk

Ghazbad_Facestompa
05-07-2015, 00:53
If Age of Sigmar is a success, perhaps. But having read the rules, I don't think there's much risk of that.

sunborn
05-07-2015, 01:43
but fans should hope AOS tanks as hard and fast as possible...
I don't think there is much danger of this not happening. The people that were still playing WFB at the end were the exact opposite of the people AoS was made for.

I tend to agree with the rest of what you said.

Scribe of Khorne
05-07-2015, 01:55
GW was 'profitable' through downsizing, slashing costs outside the realm of their models, and increasing the cost of boxes of plastic, while saving pennies EVERYWHERE else.

If we know and accept that 40K is the Goose laying the golden egg, and we know and accept that GW's numbers have been **** for years, then we must know and accept that WHFB was already operating at a loss, and likely had been for some time.

If we get to the point where an Age of the Emperor (oh hi 30K/FW) is required to 'save' 40K, well...I dont think GW will even have time to do it. 40K would have to flip a switch (and Harry says its in the 100 Million a year range for 40K right now) and become non-profitable first, before GW would considering killing that Goose.

I just dont see it.

Glyn
05-07-2015, 02:48
Just a point gw are in trouble their overall profits have been going down for years I can remember 3 years ago my local go was full on "veterans night" with 40k and fantasy being played now it's 3 of us and the "manager" no company can survive long with numbers dropping that far most gamers in my area are now playing warmahordes or xwing or mantic war of kings....the signs are there it's just waiting for the bell to ring....a friend of mine was one of the higher managers he left to find "more secure employment" to quote him

tmod
05-07-2015, 14:45
GW was 'profitable' through downsizing, slashing costs outside the realm of their models, and increasing the cost of boxes of plastic, while saving pennies EVERYWHERE else.

If we know and accept that 40K is the Goose laying the golden egg, and we know and accept that GW's numbers have been **** for years, then we must know and accept that WHFB was already operating at a loss, and likely had been for some time.

If we get to the point where an Age of the Emperor (oh hi 30K/FW) is required to 'save' 40K, well...I dont think GW will even have time to do it. 40K would have to flip a switch (and Harry says its in the 100 Million a year range for 40K right now) and become non-profitable first, before GW would considering killing that Goose.

I just dont see it.

There's a difference between loosing revenue and loosing money. According to the data we have, Fantasy never lost money, it lost revenue. This means the line was profitable, but less profitable every year. If my napkin math (and memory) is correct, 40k made a revenue of about 90 million pounds last year, down from about 115 the year before (don't trust these numbers, quick math for illustrative purposes only!). Fantasy then probably sold for just above 20 million, down a few millions from the year before. 40k is what carries the company. Fantasy is not large enough to keep the company afloat, but is still profitable. 40k might have the same or even lower profit rates, but the larger total revenue makes the total profit enough to keep GW afloat.

The overall picture has been the same many years in a row now: both games make less money every year, both probably profitable, but revenue and profit drop every year. The last years they have minimized costs, cranked up the volume of releases, had a huge fantasy campaign, replaced their most selling product (40k) yet still they have lost both revenue and profit (about ~8%).

Let's put this another way. If they've lost 40 millions in revenue the last three years, and fantasy was less than 25% of 40k's sales as reported, they've lost 14 millions more than the total Fantasy sales! Literally not a single sale of whfb over the last three years CANNOT explain their drop in sales. The only explanation is that 40k is tanking hard as well, even with the increased release rate, and GW is probably scared ******** about saving their failing flagship.

Just check out the competition. The market as a whole is booming, GW is tanking and loosing market share fast. If they don't so something quickly they might not be able to recover their lost customers. With the current trend, PP and FFG will outgrow GW in five-ten years. AOS is probably an experiment with the market segment they can survive loosing, to see if they can turn this around. If it fails, they will try some other drastic measures...

Sent fra min GT-I9506 via Tapatalk

Spell_of_Destruction
05-07-2015, 16:17
Well the issue seems to be that a. GW has executives that don't seem to know what they're doing and b. a lack of talent in the design studio.

Let's not forget that GW success was built on the talent and passion of a handful of individuals, most of whom are no longer with the company.

Commissar Merces
05-07-2015, 17:11
As soon as this ATC tournament is done, I am officially out of the hobby. 40k has lost so much appeal in the last year. No creativity anymore. Army lists aren't designed: they are a shopping cart list that GW provides you for extra models. It's an army building system designed for children. The artwork has gotten worse in the past year, and prices only continue to rise.

I've been in this hobby since 2000. I've loved every minute of it, but I am getting out of it now before the AoS comes crashing down into 40k. I may pick it up again at some point, but not until GW cleans house.

Scribe of Khorne
05-07-2015, 19:10
@tmod, fair points. I just dont think that the fantasy side was enough to make it worth keeping, was it actually damaging their profits when you look at useless stock, and overhead? I dont know. 40K getting to that point? I dont know.

On the flip side, look at 30K, they just seem to continue to knock it out of the park.

tmod
05-07-2015, 21:45
@tmod, fair points. I just dont think that the fantasy side was enough to make it worth keeping, was it actually damaging their profits when you look at useless stock, and overhead? I dont know. 40K getting to that point? I dont know.

On the flip side, look at 30K, they just seem to continue to knock it out of the park.

That's the thing, when they have a huge retail being profitable is not enough to warrant shelf space. I doubt Fantasy was in such a poor state that they actually lost money keeping it on the shelves yet, but no doubt the writing was on the wall.

The thing is, fantasy was booming along with 40k at some point, something happened to both systems causing them to stagnate. My guess is a combination of too high prices for the quality you get and too poor rules due to the best talent movinh elsewhere. Both have the same drop in sales at a roughly similar rate, but Fantasy was always going to reach the critical point where they couldn't justify the shelf space first...

I think the success of the 30k stuff is actually an indication I'm right. Never played/bought it myself, but according to what I read it's a really fun and balanced system (due to everyone having access to the same stuff), and though expensive the models are gorgeous, truly the high quality GW claims all their stuff is. The price might be higher, but people are willing to pay for a premium product. Fantasy/regular 40K just isn't those premium products GW believe them to be, and thus they fail. Because it's a hobby more than a game, sales will taper off slowly with people hoping "things will improve". Well, unless you nuke the world and release a product not playtested that is...

Note that Forgeworld is not GW's only success these last years, Black Library and Licensing, both fantasy and 40k, brings in increasing revenue...

Really, it's just the games that are failing, and the leadership don't see that as problematic because they're not really in the market of selling games...

Sent fra min GT-I9506 via Tapatalk

jet_palero
06-07-2015, 02:34
That's the thing, when they have a huge retail being profitable is not enough to warrant shelf space. I doubt Fantasy was in such a poor state that they actually lost money keeping it on the shelves yet, but no doubt the writing was on the wall.

The thing is, fantasy was booming along with 40k at some point, something happened to both systems causing them to stagnate. My guess is a combination of too high prices for the quality you get and too poor rules due to the best talent movinh elsewhere. Both have the same drop in sales at a roughly similar rate, but Fantasy was always going to reach the critical point where they couldn't justify the shelf space first...

I think the success of the 30k stuff is actually an indication I'm right. Never played/bought it myself, but according to what I read it's a really fun and balanced system (due to everyone having access to the same stuff), and though expensive the models are gorgeous, truly the high quality GW claims all their stuff is. The price might be higher, but people are willing to pay for a premium product. Fantasy/regular 40K just isn't those premium products GW believe them to be, and thus they fail. Because it's a hobby more than a game, sales will taper off slowly with people hoping "things will improve". Well, unless you nuke the world and release a product not playtested that is...

Note that Forgeworld is not GW's only success these last years, Black Library and Licensing, both fantasy and 40k, brings in increasing revenue...

Really, it's just the games that are failing, and the leadership don't see that as problematic because they're not really in the market of selling games...

Sent fra min GT-I9506 via Tapatalk

The fact that GW thinks they're a miniatures company that also has a game, is the core of all their problems. But that doesn't seem likely to change. I fully expect them to AoS 40k. This sort of project takes a LOT of advance planning, and I really doubt GW is intelligent enough to wait for it to succeed before starting the process for 40k. Management has hit the "I believe" button on AoS, or they wouldn't have rolled it out the way they did (all or nothing). And when management "believes" something, then they don't wait around for things like "actual results."

It'll come to 40k eventually. Maybe with moderate improvements, but the theme will remain.

Scribe of Khorne
06-07-2015, 02:45
I fully believe that both ranges where most successful when tournaments and community engagement where both at their height, and the ever declining level of profits would tie to that drop in competitive value.

With a system to play meaningful games (meaningful as in 'my choices matter') players are willing to pay the price ($$$) once you take control out of the players hands, it becomes a lot harder to justify.

jet_palero
06-07-2015, 02:59
I fully believe that both ranges where most successful when tournaments and community engagement where both at their height, and the ever declining level of profits would tie to that drop in competitive value.

With a system to play meaningful games (meaningful as in 'my choices matter') players are willing to pay the price ($$$) once you take control out of the players hands, it becomes a lot harder to justify.

I agree. Games like this, and video games too, rely on two things.

1. The casual player. He's most of your money. He buys your product and plays it and has fun, but the key is that he wishes he was the other kind of player.
2. The serious player. This guy individually spends more money, but demographically he's rare. But what he does is that he brings in the casual players. he builds communities, starts websites, makes mods (for video games), he does so much work for the company because he loves the product. He's the guy who wins most tournaments, who posts the netlists, who actually gives a damn. with miniatures he's the guy who's posting heavily converted and well painted figures that the rest of the community drools over, and is inspired by. But #2 wants the developer to take the game as seriously as he does.

#2 drives up your #1 numbers when your community isn't toxic. Even when your community is a bit toxic (like some of the MOBAs) #2 still can be somewhat of a positive influence as he's something #1 aspires to. Just as long as there's no way for them to run into him too much. When you have a positive community, #2 is basically the key free marketing. #2 are the hardcore raiders in the MMO. The ladder leaders in the MOBA. The purples in WoT. The netlist writers, the great painters, and the community organizers in Warhammer.

That's how I've seen it in so many other communities anyway. And sure there's guys in between, these are just the extremes.

Mawduce
06-07-2015, 07:24
I agree. Games like this, and video games too, rely on two things.

1. The casual player. He's most of your money. He buys your product and plays it and has fun, but the key is that he wishes he was the other kind of player.
2. The serious player. This guy individually spends more money, but demographically he's rare. But what he does is that he brings in the casual players. he builds communities, starts websites, makes mods (for video games), he does so much work for the company because he loves the product. He's the guy who wins most tournaments, who posts the netlists, who actually gives a damn. with miniatures he's the guy who's posting heavily converted and well painted figures that the rest of the community drools over, and is inspired by. But #2 wants the developer to take the game as seriously as he does.

#2 drives up your #1 numbers when your community isn't toxic. Even when your community is a bit toxic (like some of the MOBAs) #2 still can be somewhat of a positive influence as he's something #1 aspires to. Just as long as there's no way for them to run into him too much. When you have a positive community, #2 is basically the key free marketing. #2 are the hardcore raiders in the MMO. The ladder leaders in the MOBA. The purples in WoT. The netlist writers, the great painters, and the community organizers in Warhammer.

That's how I've seen it in so many other communities anyway. And sure there's guys in between, these are just the extremes.

#2 is the base politicians stir up before an election to get swing voters their way, that's how I always looked at it.

totgeboren
06-07-2015, 09:29
I fully believe that both ranges where most successful when tournaments and community engagement where both at their height, and the ever declining level of profits would tie to that drop in competitive value.

With a system to play meaningful games (meaningful as in 'my choices matter') players are willing to pay the price ($$$) once you take control out of the players hands, it becomes a lot harder to justify.

Even if I have never been into the tournament scene (only attended like three since 2ed), I have to say I agree.
A thriving tournament scene means you have a healthy game. Just look at 7th ed Daemons and Vampires in whfb. They broke the game and it never recovered it seems, and now the entire system was scrapped more or less.

Dkoz
06-07-2015, 09:34
I really hope AoS never comes to 40K, after reading threw the free rules and unless something changes when GW starts selling the BRB this looks all kind of messed up.

ehlijen
06-07-2015, 10:29
The worrying thing is that 40k has been moving towards what AoS now is for the last few editions.

Gazak Blacktoof
06-07-2015, 12:26
Forgeworld, or rather the heresy series, may save 40k from being AOS'd. There's a lot invested in the long term development of the game with the current rules. However maybe that's wishful thinking on my part!

Avian
06-07-2015, 12:29
Forgeworld, or rather the heresy series, may save 40k from being AOS'd. There's a lot invested in the long term development of the game with the current rules. However maybe that's wishful thinking on my part!
Presumably what you meant is that only HH would get the AoS treatment, leaving normal 40K with proper rules. ;)

my_name_is_tudor
06-07-2015, 13:47
With 40K already successful I think they could actually release a 40K: Age of Ultramar (ha) game alongside traditional 40K.

On the face of things it would be a separate game, but with the subtext being that it was intended to replace the old game once it had gained traction.

A 40K 'End Times' feels inevitable at the moment. There are now so many hints and threads in Codexes to coming disasters across the galaxy.

totgeboren
06-07-2015, 13:48
Presumably what you meant is that only HH would get the AoS treatment, leaving normal 40K with proper rules. ;)

To be honest, if the rumour of a new HH-themed boxed game pans out, focused strictly on marine vs marine games, then a super-simple system like the AoS one would make sense. I mean, if basically all models have BS4, T4 and a 3+ save, you can simplify things quite a bit.

Commissar Davis
06-07-2015, 15:03
Given that armies in AoS appear to have formations (look at the second to last page, The Empire has two on page 30 of the PDF) it could be that AoS becomes more like 7Ed WH40K

Herkamer63
06-07-2015, 15:10
So far, from what people had told me after a few games, AoS sounds like it's a lot of fun. I know others on here are going to tell me "there's no way that's possible, I never read anything about people liking it, no one likes it", but honestly, according to what I've read, there's more strategy, and balance, to it than what critics are saying. I can't wait to get a few games.

With all that said, however, this system is only unique to AoS, NOT 40k. Regardless of what people are saying about GW's sales, 40k is still there top seller and will continue to be that way for a long time. The gaming system and its rules are still simple (especially compared to WFB 8th ed), the models still look good, and the fluff keeps people intrigued. Also, I agree with totgeboren when it comes to the, rumored, HH game GW is developing. If a 40k game gets the simplified rules like AoS, this would be it. I would be ok with that as long as it keeps some other elements of 40k: AP, Vehicle Armor and their HP, etc. Good point, totgeboren.

Thorien
06-07-2015, 16:13
IMHO The new GW management listened to potential customers who told them the old rules are an extreme turn off because of their complexity. So they made them very simple and probably will need to make adjustments for tournament players. I think they need to do this for 40k as well. (Don't throw bricks)

I tried to get my wife into playing. She took one look at the book and said that it was stupidly complex and wasn't interested in a career of math to play. I can't blame her.

Having said that I'd like to point out there is no reason GW cannot have more than one set of rules for any given range of models.

For that matter, there is nothing stopping anyone from crafting their own.

ik0ner
06-07-2015, 17:02
IMHO The new GW management listened to potential customers who told them the old rules are an extreme turn off because of their complexity. So they made them very simple and probably will need to make adjustments for tournament players. I think they need to do this for 40k as well. (Don't throw bricks)

I tried to get my wife into playing. She took one look at the book and said that it was stupidly complex and wasn't interested in a career of math to play. I can't blame her.

Having said that I'd like to point out there is no reason GW cannot have more than one set of rules for any given range of models.

For that matter, there is nothing stopping anyone from crafting their own.

How do you know that for every potential customer turned off by the complexity, there isn't a customer turned on by the very same quality? I think there is no proof to any side of the gw-debates raging, just a lot of conjecture.

The weird thing about AoS is that it is supposedly more streamlined and fastflowing and fun. I would argue that so far all my test games have been the opposite. The combat activation thing makes it very disjointed and adds complexity. The need to look up every units card (or scroll), and then shifting between combats depending on who wants to activate what is a lot more work than having a reference page and a couple of charts. IMO

Thorien
06-07-2015, 20:07
How do you know that for every potential customer turned off by the complexity, there isn't a customer turned on by the very same quality? I think there is no proof to any side of the gw-debates raging, just a lot of conjecture.

The weird thing about AoS is that it is supposedly more streamlined and fastflowing and fun. I would argue that so far all my test games have been the opposite. The combat activation thing makes it very disjointed and adds complexity. The need to look up every units card (or scroll), and then shifting between combats depending on who wants to activate what is a lot more work than having a reference page and a couple of charts. IMO

GW Sales figures. Their gross is not on an upward trend, shall we say. Quite the opposite. Do more people play checkers or WHFB? That's the key question. There are far fewer people willing to take on a complex rule set. Also complex system are inherently difficult to balance.

Still there is no reason GW can't make more than one ruleset. One for people who don't want a career of math-hammer and those that want to just play.

popisdead
06-07-2015, 20:12
Age of Sigmar is Warhammer 10k or 20k.

It's Cadia before Lorgar went :P

If you want to rage feel free, but I bet the games get merged in time. And if you don't like change, ah well.

tmod
06-07-2015, 23:46
GW Sales figures. Their gross is not on an upward trend, shall we say. Quite the opposite. Do more people play checkers or WHFB? That's the key question. There are far fewer people willing to take on a complex rule set. Also complex system are inherently difficult to balance.

Still there is no reason GW can't make more than one ruleset. One for people who don't want a career of math-hammer and those that want to just play.

We do know something is/wrong, but we don't know jack **** about what. Neither does gw, thanks to no market research. Too much complexity might be the problem, but it could also be that the main issue for the big masses is the oversimplification of the rules over the past 20 years or so. I for one believe cost and lack of a well-marketed entry-game (Mordheim 2.0) are the main factors, but this is just a guess based on my own experiences and a quick napkin analysis of the competition... We simply don't know!

Given that GW never even tried to save WHFB I think we can safely assume AOS is a testbed for a future 40k version though...

Sent fra min GT-I9506 via Tapatalk

Darnok
07-07-2015, 05:06
I hope that "Never!" is what we'll get. I'm not that confident though.

With GWs long lead times, whatever they have planned for the next edition of 40K is already set in stone and moving. And some of the developments of 7th edition - the new codex structure, formations essentially being "warscrolls", unbound play - point in a similar direction of what they have done with AoS. So while it is not necessary that 40K goes down the same path, the signs are definitely there.

Zustiur
07-07-2015, 06:01
All the more reason to start writing my own edition that still looks like a genuine successor. I've seen too many attempts on rules design forums that varied too wildly. A true successor (if such becomes necessary) must resemble the current game as much as possible to allow more people to embrace it as an alternative to whatever GW does next. Pathfinder 40k of you will.

Sent via Tapatalk 2

jtrowell
07-07-2015, 09:52
I expect the first AoS-like system to be released for the rumoured HH new game.

This way they will be able to try the new system in a Sci-fi context without directly impacting 40k in theory.

The problem of course is that people might well buy the HH models to use in 40k as proxies, giving a false impression of "success".

Darnok
07-07-2015, 10:05
The problem of course is that people might well buy the HH models to use in 40k as proxies, giving a false impression of "success".

So exactly like AoS. :D

Andy p
07-07-2015, 14:40
Something I have picked up from AOS and transported to 40k when I play is joke-style rules from the old fantasy army battlescrolls.

For example during my psychic phase if my Shadowseer manages to manifest Mirror of Minds I lock eyes with my opponent, start shaking and attempt to pop my forehead vein out like i'm in a duel from Scanners. Unfortunately the person usually leaves alarmed before I get to the 'clawing my skin off' part which is a shame as I've got it down quite well.

Can't seem to find many games these days though.

Templar Ben
07-07-2015, 16:11
With a name like Age of Ultramar, they would move 10,000 units before people realize it has nothing to do with the Avengers.

40K is in for interesting times. That is a blessing and a curse I suppose.

Hoffa
10-07-2015, 10:58
I just had a thought, everyone was surprised at the release of 7:th just two years after 6:th. Also everyone agrees that GW has ramped up the release rate the last year. They did this with fantasy as well. What if it is for the same reason. To make make money on everything that was to far down the pipe to just cancel. When all this is out the world ending event is triggered and a year later 40k goes age of Sigmar.

Avian
10-07-2015, 11:36
It would not surprise me one bit. Unless something very strange happens, I expect the HH box (supposedly out later this year) to use the AoS system, and unless something very strange happens with that, I expect that 40K will get the same. On the bright side, it seems unlikely that they'll be able to fit it in before 2017.

Spiney Norman
10-07-2015, 11:53
It would not surprise me one bit. Unless something very strange happens, I expect the HH box (supposedly out later this year) to use the AoS system, and unless something very strange happens with that, I expect that 40K will get the same. On the bright side, it seems unlikely that they'll be able to fit it in before 2017.

I think if this is true the current AoS rage storm will be completely drowned out by the torrent of vitriol if they make 40k completely pointless. It does make me wonder if Forgeworld would continue to produce rules for their heresy line for 7th Ed or not, I can't really see the sense in GW lopping the head off of the golden HH goose when it obviously has many years of laying left in it.

Avian
10-07-2015, 14:02
Presumably the 40K version of the End Times will be called 'Warhammer 40,000: Apocalypse, But For Real This Time'.

KingDeath
13-07-2015, 23:27
If the gods are good then never.

AngryAngel
14-07-2015, 04:08
I think if this is true the current AoS rage storm will be completely drowned out by the torrent of vitriol if they make 40k completely pointless. It does make me wonder if Forgeworld would continue to produce rules for their heresy line for 7th Ed or not, I can't really see the sense in GW lopping the head off of the golden HH goose when it obviously has many years of laying left in it.

They've already shown they are getting rid of one chaos god, I'm sure that will splash over to 40k, something we never thought they'd do. Mark my words, Age of the Emperor is coming people, mark my words, for when they are proven right, it will be my darkest day.

Scribe of Khorne
14-07-2015, 05:17
I WILL buy a plane ticket, and I will torch my army before their bloated golden idol.

AngryAngel
14-07-2015, 06:08
I WILL buy a plane ticket, and I will torch my army before their bloated golden idol.

If you do you better put the link on here and I will applaud you for it !!

Losing Command
14-07-2015, 09:53
I WILL buy a plane ticket, and I will torch my army before their bloated golden idol.

Judging GW's mindset lately, they'll see it as a praise to their decision :rolleyes:

totgeboren
14-07-2015, 10:52
I WILL buy a plane ticket, and I will torch my army before their bloated golden idol.

GW will applaud you for your dedication to only using the very latest models, even going so far as to destroy your old ones instead of e-baying them! Or that is what they will think at least. :p

Ghazbad_Facestompa
15-07-2015, 04:17
I wouldn't. I'd pack them in boxes and wait for GW to fold and a better company to buy the IP. Maybe start some historicals.

Ayin
15-07-2015, 04:40
If the gods are good then never.

They are not. They are fickle and chaotic.


And one of them has beady little rat-eyes.

f2k
15-07-2015, 07:25
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if they did that.

Even if 40K is vastly more popular then Fantasy, it's sliding slowly towards oblivion. Something has to be done, and since Games Workshop considers themselves first and foremost a miniature company, getting rid of all those troublesome rules would seem to be a logical step.

Truth to be told, they don't even seem to be trying these days. The balance is getting worse, Unbound is basically the 40K equivalent of the Age of Sigmar, and datacards are slowly replacing the traditional force organisation. So why not take the final step and get rid of rules and armies altogether?

insectum7
15-07-2015, 08:24
They've already shown they are getting rid of one chaos god, I'm sure that will splash over to 40k, something we never thought they'd do. Mark my words, Age of the Emperor is coming people, mark my words, for when they are proven right, it will be my darkest day.

Nahh, they're folding the universes together. AoS can't have Slaneesh because she/he hasn't been born yet. #ThunderWarriors


Why kill off Slaneesh anyways? I'm suspicious that it might have something to do with targeting AoS at a younger or more worldwide crowd or some other demographic strategy.


Unbound is basically the 40K equivalent of the Age of Sigmar,

I still have yet to see an unbound army.

Denny
15-07-2015, 14:48
I WILL buy a plane ticket, and I will torch my army before their bloated golden idol.

Seems rather too much like an offering to their new golden god; "Take my outdated miniatures for I am not worthy." :eyebrows:

I don't get all this talk about burning your army. Who burns their own stuff in protest? What happened to a good old flaming effigy? Kirby would seem to be the obvious choice.

Failing that, does GW have an offical flag?

TheKillerCoyote
15-07-2015, 15:42
Seems rather too much like an offering to their new golden god; "Take my outdated miniatures for I am not worthy." :eyebrows:

I don't get all this talk about burning your army. Who burns their own stuff in protest? What happened to a good old flaming effigy? Kirby would seem to be the obvious choice.

Failing that, does GW have an offical flag?

To be honest, I agree.
It's much more effective to burn the stuff of the people you disagree with. :-)

Denny
15-07-2015, 16:02
To be honest, I agree.
It's much more effective to burn the stuff of the people you disagree with. :-)

Unless GW is smart enough to start selling us official flags through their stores, with the kerosene and matches as an add-on . . .

Adyger
15-07-2015, 16:52
How is 40K moving closer to AOS? If anything, it seems to me that it is moving closer to what 2nd Edition was. With the recent changes like overwatch and the plethora of special rules, the game seems more complex than it did when I played 4th or 5th. In some ways, even the freedom of lists is more akin to the old days where things were based purely on percentages.

Griefbringer
15-07-2015, 17:12
Unless GW is smart enough to start selling us official flags through their stores, with the kerosene and matches as an add-on . . .

"Kerosene and matches? Those are not kerosene and matches, they are genuine Adeptus Sororitas Promethium Containers (TM) and Blessed Firesticks of the Inquisition (TM). Combined they will provide the most purifying holy flames of the Emperor!"

Scribe of Khorne
15-07-2015, 17:27
I think actually, based on the Bay open, we are in a more balanced phase of 40K than we have been for some time. :p

TheFang
15-07-2015, 19:30
I think if this is true the current AoS rage storm will be completely drowned out by the torrent of vitriol if they make 40k completely pointless.
It'll look like a christmas cracker next to Krakatoa.

It does make me wonder if Forgeworld would continue to produce rules for their heresy line for 7th Ed or not, I can't really see the sense in GW lopping the head off of the golden HH goose when it obviously has many years of laying left in it.That's the only real hope that Forgeworld's line and rules can protect the game's integrity.
Presumably the 40K version of the End Times will be called 'Warhammer 40,000: Apocalypse, But For Real This Time'."We really mean it this time!"
And one of them has beady little rat-eyes.That's no way to talk about the board of directors.
Failing that, does GW have an offical flag?Crossed piles of cash on a field of cash.

ehlijen
15-07-2015, 22:02
How is 40K moving closer to AOS? If anything, it seems to me that it is moving closer to what 2nd Edition was. With the recent changes like overwatch and the plethora of special rules, the game seems more complex than it did when I played 4th or 5th. In some ways, even the freedom of lists is more akin to the old days where things were based purely on percentages.

For one, it's not moving to second ed it's moving to rogue trader which was very much like AoS is now, except that GW didn't forget to tell players that it's meant to be a GMed game.

AoS does also still have some rules complexity with spells and the various abilities. But what 40k has been moving towards is unbound & formations as an army building mechanic despite the greater complexity of available unit types making the removal of strict FOC rules a bad idea (given that unbound exists, any FOC rule in 7th is a joke. For one, they have no bite, for two, they'll only be followed as long as they help make an army more powerful (and they do), otherwise it'd be unbound all the time). 7th's been using formations as a balancing mechanic more and more (free extras for taking certain units, bypassing the points for power system altogether), which is a bad idea to combine with points, so I'm thinking points aren't going to stay for long. It's never even had the ranked formation movement rules, so it's already with AoS in that regard. The randomtastic terrain tables have been in 8th and 6th+7th ed respectively, as they have been in 40k 1st-3rd edition, but they are still not a good idea as a blanket rule in AoS.

In short, just because GW are embracing past rules concepts doesn't mean the game is getting better. AoS brought back armour save modifiers, after all, but then kicked out the WS and S/T tables altogether. One step forward, two steps back.

The playerbase GW has been attracting with 3rd-5th ed 40k and 6th-7th fantasy are mostly players who want balanced wargame were both players make their army in isolation, come to the table, discover the terrain and objectives and then, with their prechosen armies, have a game where both players have equal starting chances at victory assuming equal skill. No, 40k has never truly delivered that, but in that time it's always at least pretended to try and usually been close enough for many people. 6th and 7th have moved away, insisting that the correct way to play is for both players to construct armies, or even the whole battle, together and then play without care for balance or victory (while still telling the players that victory is the objective of the game).
Those players exist, and GW wants to cater only to them now for whatever reasons, even if that means annoying every other type of player.

Charistoph
15-07-2015, 22:10
AoS brought back armour save modifiers, after all...

Not really. Warhammer Fantasy has been using Armour Save modifiers for a long time. In fact, just the Str of a weapon over 3 was enough to provide an Armour Save Modifier.

ehlijen
16-07-2015, 01:31
Not really. Warhammer Fantasy has been using Armour Save modifiers for a long time. In fact, just the Str of a weapon over 3 was enough to provide an Armour Save Modifier.

True, my bad. Haven't played fantasy in ages (even more ages than 40k), and when I look at AoS I keep seeing 40k.

danyboy
17-07-2015, 19:37
WFB didn't sell well - they had to do something.
40k is golden mine and I don't think they risk that drastic change. For what? Storyline progression? I don't think so.

ehlijen
17-07-2015, 23:58
WFB didn't sell well - they had to do something.
40k is golden mine and I don't think they risk that drastic change. For what? Storyline progression? I don't think so.

6th ed 40k was selling, and we still got 7th only two years later. While 7th was very similar to 6th, it still took a few important steps towards something like AoS over 6th (mainly opening the FOC to the point of meaninglessness).

40k is selling, yes, but I think AoS for 40k is something GW simply wants to do, not something they see as a last resort. So we will see it sooner or later unless their corporate culture does a turnabout.

shin'keiro
18-07-2015, 16:49
For one, it's not moving to second ed it's moving to rogue trader which was very much like AoS is now, except that GW didn't forget to tell players that it's meant to be a GMed game.

Correct, Rogue Trader was a roleplaying game, so there was no need for points.
GW started off as a roleplaying game company. In particular, creating adventures and articles for Dungeons and Dragons (D&D).

Griefbringer
19-07-2015, 09:39
WH40K Rogue Trader actually had a points system in the main rulebook. And WD started publishing army lists for it relatively soon.

TheFang
19-07-2015, 14:15
Correct, Rogue Trader was a roleplaying game, so there was no need for points.
Incorrect. Points Values on p58 of Rogue Trader. "If you don't have a GM then a points system does at least provide a basis for what should be a fair game." (p60 Rogue Trader)
White Dwarf articles and the first supplement (Book of the Astronomican) introduced full army lists and comprehensive point values.


GW started off as a roleplaying game company. In particular, creating adventures and articles for Dungeons and Dragons (D&D).No. They started with traditional boardgames then they started importing US games to the UK.

Grubnar
25-07-2015, 06:52
If the gods are good then never.

In the grim darkness of the far future, the gods are cruel and quite mad!

anselminus
25-07-2015, 12:16
Never Never Never !!!!

AngryAngel
26-07-2015, 17:40
I can't wait to see the reaction when it does come to 40k, then we'll see what those who said it never would have to say. I'm sure the many stages of denial will begin.