Quote:

Originally Posted by 75hatsings69

Quote: Originally Posted by Avian I can't get that to mesh with what you said about them being worried that players would not want to buy a book that was invalidated a year or so later.

Quote: I don't understand where you get your comparison from. An army book lasts about 5 years on average, so if you had three armies under the current system you would need 3 books every 5 years. However under your example system you would instead need 5 books every 5 years, which is definitely worse from a customer perspective and gets worse the less armies you collect.....

Quote: Originally Posted by Daigar This all sounds like typical GW decisionmaking.



Kirby: Warhammer Fantasy is too expensive to get into. It hurts our sales. What do we do?



Employee 1: Lower the prices!



Kirby:...



Employee 2: Fiddle with the mechanics until it is viable to play smaller games!



Kirby:...



Employee 3: Let's force people to get all the army books they DON'T need!



Kirby: BRILLIANT!

Quote: Originally Posted by Eldarin Sales, of course. But it also makes much more sense.



It becomes orders of magnitude simpler to balance the game and it gives a opportunity to affect all the meta at the same time rather than incrementally change it one race at a time.



For example, when 8th rejigged the magic phase and we had a good few releases to bring books in line (or how WE playstyle became much harder overnight). If it was the case that all rules were updated at the same time then everything gets a fix at the same time. This can only be a benefit.



Not having one-army based releases allows them to space out each army so you aren't having feast/famine if you are a 1 army person and allows them to keep drip feeding you and making you(r army) feel loved.



The fact that they could have individual background books for each army then also allows them to sell you another book, but also allows them to dig deeper into each army and really pull you in to the universe.



Finally, some variation of the 40k allies system, however it is implemented, is also good. Don't like it? Ignore it. Want to play around with your own combinations? Go nuts. It also allows the same sampling and then growing into a new army.



All in all, it sounds promising.

Quote: Originally Posted by Avian While I do think that allies has some good potential to it, by allowing too much to this they are running the risk of watering down the imagery of the game and thus increasing the blandness they apparently feel is hurting it. 40k has shown the power of strong, reasonably original imagery and I doubt you'd get the same effect with Mishmashhammer.

Quote: Originally Posted by Avian Never mind the fluff, I'm surprised to hear that game balance being presented as a major reason for the shakeup....

Quote: Originally Posted by Harry Is one way of looking at it.

The other way of looking at it is ... the reason for the changes is to try and save a much loved game that has become unprofitable.

My understanding is that the cycle of each books life before update is too long which causes issues, however increasing the frequency of updating each book multiple times per edition is even worse... would you buy a HE book if it were to be updated in under a year? This coupled with a fading popularity of WFB (sales wise) and the feeling some of the races are perhaps too generic fantasy and not "warhmer" enough leaves them with choices of either dropping WFB altogether or making some serious changes to the way in which races are represented and in which army lists etc are sold. It HAS to be the latter to make back the £ spent on all the manufacture/design work for the best return possible for investors/shareholders. I suppose they 'could' have gone down the road of putting updates in WD but that would mean WD having actual content and wasting advertising/store listing space lol!!(...)Popular armies will continue to receive more new units/kits/support whereas less popular armies (e.g. WE/Brets) may be 'lumped together' with their 'combined' force getting shared new kits etc. in all honesty what "warhammer" additions would any of you add to bretonnia army range???? big monster? No war machines? No, more horse types? No due to lack of variety etc. instead give them options to add say units from a wood elf force after all they are closely linked in the fluff. Then maybe when it comes time to add something new bret players would be happy to buy for example plastic WE stag riders as a MC choice and also pick up some existing WE kits to theme their army up more.I feel the changes are going to allow much more freedom in building an "army" that will allow you to just take models from your collection and field them together as a force.... the only real concern then would be balance.... BUT if you're no longer going across 13 seperate publications produced years apart by different authors with different editions in mind it might not be such a big issue after all. Imagine if it was maybe 1 or 2 publications that could be updated almost annually, wouldn't that lead to better balance and also potentially bring more fun back to warhammer? just a thoughtBecause you'd not be buying A (singular) army book that would be updated once a year for example to keep balance issues and additions/new units etc. you'd be buying potentially a book that covered lists for EVERY army and allowed you to make your own army once a year. So if you had 3 WFB armies you wouldn't need 6 books in a 2 year period only 2 books. The yearly thing was just an illustrative point that I added as an example not an accurate forecast. The current model of updating armies etc is too imbalanced leaving some races behind etc.Also IMO a system that allows people to play WFB with models they want to buy from various ranges is a winner for GW. For example I know people who like the NEW HE models but won't buy them because they hate the core plastics, if there was a way of fielding (and indeed selling) models to people that they could buy everything new they liked and add it to other existing kits they like/own then this would be better for GW and if sales improve because of this potentially better for WFB (so long as they don't allow stupid SoM HE with Deamon allow type fluff breaking crap - which of course they probably will to sell more models).Did you read my earlier post? The issue is one of imbalance, different authors writing with different editions in mind. Also supporting each individual army as an entirely different product when some don't sell well is not the best use of time. The yearly thing as I've now said twice was only an example. If there was 1 or 2 books that were updated even every 2 years there would still be better balance, faqs could be added into the update as could new units. Right now you have to pretty much wait 4-6 years for your WFB to get updated or get a new unit, what if that changed to every year or two years? Instead of a block release of 4 new HE kits then nothing for 5 years what if you got 2 HE, 2 DE then the following month 2 skaven & 2 WoC? these were all featured in your 1 more regularly updated book. I think it would sell more by miles. For example WFB players who don't play DoC, WoC or HE probably haven't bought anything since September last year now imagine there's a release for your army every 3 months in fact a release for every army every 3 months its a much more steady income IMO.(...)Ok these printed updates to update each army book and include FAQ/Errata etc. how does it get published/distributed? How much does it cost to print/store/transport/sell an update like this each time for EVERY army ON TOP of the above cost for each and every book? How does this streamline the process or make the cost better??? Answer it doesn't. It would be more costly and add more stuff to handle/print/store etc which is exactly what they want to head away from.The answer is fewer books that contain more updated more often. Not the same number of books updated ever 4-10 years with 4-10 years worth of updates/FAQs/Errata etc as well to go with them.I'm by no means the sharpest knife in the drawer (and I mean no offence by my next statement) but I can't see why some people can't grasp this concept?(...)Mate im not nor are GW concerned if its cheaper for YOU im talking about it being cheaper for GW!!!! please try to understand that the WFB model as it is doesnt generate enough £ to allow it to exist in the way it does, it isnt making the returns on investment the 40k does, so it has to change. this means cutting costs and making the game more accessible and less rigid than it is now.I'm not going to be drawn into debates about this any more, I kind of wish I'd not bloody posted about it now. Like it or not big changes are coming.(...)If I were still into GW/WFB I think I'd be happy to defend it, I actually quite like the idea... what I don't like are kits made of finecast, plastic kits that are poorly sculpted and cost £30 for 10 infantry style troops, models that are similar to Pokemon and models that get named using the new roll on 2 tables to come up with a name I.e. I rolled a 4 and a 2 that gives us the "slaughter" and "brute", yea well I got a 1 and a 6 which gets us the "Death Mauler" etc.You sir seem to get it entirely, it's about selling you stuff you don't need for armies you don't even collect, BUT also giving you the chance "in game" to make this fine. You could impulse purchase new stuff every month and feel no guilt as you could actually justify buying it.You win the thread.I tried to say over a period of 4-10 years with different authors writing for different editions there was too much imbalance, if it all comes pretty much at once there's more balance, then people may be drawn to try another army that currently they wouldn't because under 8th they are unbalanced/broken until the army book gets updated in x years!Finally! Thank you so much for postingYou will get no argument from me on this front Tarj. As I wrote previously the SoM HE & Darmons for me destroyed everything that 25 years of fantastic fluff stood for, all in the name of sales. If its "governed" in a manner it could be great, if not?? Well...Thing is are GWs target market actually that bothered about fluff? They can always peddle their fluff elsewhere for extra £My forecast is that GW use this as a selling/marketing point, much like the ludicrous claims of finecast. The truth is there is only one reason for the changes .... profitability.It's not really in "financial trouble" it just isn't making the returns the would like on their investments. 40k tau models couldn't even stay in stock to fulfil orders (well that's not exactly true.... it was actually the printed boxes that ran out hence why some people received models in white citadel boxes) that never happens with any WFB release.