Games Workshop and "Warhammer The Old World"

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

The brand new army book for Infernal Dwarves is finally available, along with a small surprise! Remember that it is a beta version, and provide us your feedback!

  • Games Workshop and "Warhammer The Old World"



    warhammer-community.com/2019/11/15/old-world-new-warhammer/

    warhammer-community.com/2020/0…post-1fw-homepage-post-1/

    Looks like GW might be on course to relaunch Warhammer Fantasy as a (niche?) game a few years from now.



    GeeDubs wrote:

    It’s still early days for the Old World project, but it’s great to see things already starting to come together! Over the coming months, we’ll keep you up to date with news from the project as it continues to take shape, including the lore, art, rules, and eventually… new models.
    This opens up a lot of possible discussions. I don't quite know what to say, because there is so much to say... so I'll just leave it at that and let people discuss this.
  • Ok, I'll briefly outline my thoughts on this.

    IF GW actually goes through with this, then it will be an extreme competitor with T9A. All the things that T9A sucks at, like getting books in stores, marketing, recruiting new players etc will be done EXTREMELY well by GW. Thank god they came to save us. However, I have little appetite for going to play a game that GW breaks with its usual approach to balance.

    Most likely if you have a valid 9th Age army you also have a valid "Warhammer - The Old World" army. So you might be able to go to your local Warhammer store and bring in teenagers with promises of cool fluff and fun games, and then get them into clubs where people play 9th Age with more balance.

    Another possibility is that 9th Age just gradually morphs back into the ETC. I actually think that this is the most likely scenario. People will resist this outcome fiercely, but I think that's where it's going and there's no use fighting it. We are good at balance, they are good at marketing and recruitment and fluff and art and so on. Yes, we have our own efforts to do these things, but GW will do it better. They also have roughly a thousand physical stores where "Warhammer - The Old World" will physically go on the shelves. How many stores is our stuff in?

    Unfortunately even a comped version of "Warhammer - The Old World" might be a less fun and less well-balanced game than T9A, and that does make me sad. But at the same time, I expect that "Warhammer - The Old World" will return a lot of character to various armies that have been blandified a bit too much by us. Orcs and Goblins particularly.

    EDIT: One thing that complicates predicting the future here is that GW might decide to do "Warhammer - The Old World" with Age of Sigmar style rules. If that happens - and there's a good chance it might - then Ninth Age will keep its niche, but with the added benefit of plenty of new GW models to use.


    Just my take. I expect that a lot of people will disagree with me very strongly, but I'm just putting it out there.

    The post was edited 2 times, last by Warboss_R'ok ().


  • Ok, seriously though, there's a few things to consider before jumping on this bandwagon and this isn't entirely targeted at OP who had a bit of a more nuanced take.

    1) I think that the vast majority of people who think T9A will die as soon as this is released are only saying so because they themselves will be happy to go back to GW. I'd like to define this as the "Scorned Warhammer Player" part of the T9A player base. Those who were very upset that GW killed Fantasy and play T9A as a substitute until - as OP put it - GW comes back to save them.

    However, I don't think the effect will be as drastic as you might think. I mean, think about it: There's multiple editions of Warhammer Fantasy that you can play right now with your friends or club. Nothing's stopping you and unless you're gunning for some rare armies like Tomb Kings, second hand armies are fairly easy and cheap to get a hold of. So why aren't you playing Warhammer if it's so great?

    The obvious answer is because it isn't. Don't get me wrong, WFB was great fun but it's not at all as good or as fun of a game as T9A. And at the end of the day, that's what really matters. If droves of people aren't leaving to go play previous editions of Warhammer, why would they leave to play The Old World?

    2) We have no idea what The Old World will be. Other than the fact that it'll take place in the old world and (unless something changes) use square bases. But at the moment, that's all we have to go on and considering point 1, I'm not overly concerned, unless GW really makes a genuinely good game.

    Will you like the rules? Will you like the new models? Will you like the background? What if they don't bring back your favourite characters, will you still like it? There are a lot of things that go into making a successful game aside from "Old world w00t" which bring me to my next point

    3) There are a lot of things that go into making a successful game. Hence why it'll take years before this is ready. So we really have to consider what the future will be like. What will T9A be like in 3 years? Also, what will the miniature industry be like in 3 years? Personally, I can't see myself going back to limiting myself to GW models that will likely still be very expensive, considering that I can 3D print an army for much cheaper and with access to thousands of miniatures.


    One particular thing to consider is that The Old World will most likely not be Warhammer Fantasy. WFB wasn't cancelled because GW just woke up one day and said "bugger this, more Space Marines!". WFB wasn't that profitable at the end. AoS is working out better for them so whatever the game ends up being - it'll not follow the WFB business model. That likely means simpler rules, fewer models and all the other things Fantasy Players generally dislike about AoS - and they're not likely to start enjoying it in The Old World (unless they go off Keto, I guess).

    That being said, there are those that will. I doubt it'll be enough people to send T9A back to the shadows of ETC or whatever but there are undoubtedly some who just love the Warhammer setting and will play whatever game GW supports. And that's fine.


    The only thing that we can really do for the T9A project is to keep improving the game. Competition is generally a good thing and this is no exception. We know that this game will arrive in a couple of years and so we should definitely look at what we can do better to give people the best game possible and that includes background and marketing and all these things.

    I had a short discussion yesterday with one of the guys in my area and we both agreed that one of the problems T9A has is the learning curve. Some armies are more forgiving than others but generally it's not a game that's easy to learn and unless you're playing against someone who's also new at the game, as a beginner you have to be prepared to lose quite a bit before you get better. That doesn't necessarily mean the game is bad. Look at Chess which is perhaps the most popular strategy board game in the world: Extreme high level of play and not easy to get into as a beginner against experienced players.

    So yeah, I see The Old World as a good motivator for us. We'll definitely want the game to be at a great place when GW launches it!
    My wife and I just released our first video game title!
  • Vamp87 wrote:

    This is the most obscure and best forum reference I've seen. I still remember those posts about how the Keto diet caused you to like ninth age over age of sigmar.
    It's hard to resist making the Keto jokes whenever someone brings up AoS :P

    Warboss_R wrote:

    The name is a bit unclear - WH:TOW is separate from AoS!
    I think there's been at least two older threads about it but yeah that one was from way back when they just teased Square bases, a day or so before the old world reveal.

    *shrugs* not like we don't have multiple topics on almost anything. Remember warmachine base debate (they cheated squares)?
    My wife and I just released our first video game title!
  • Hombre de Mundo wrote:

    think there's been at least two older threads about it but yeah that one was from way back when they just teased Square bases, a day or so before the old world reveal.

    *shrugs* not like we don't have multiple topics on almost anything.
    Oh, I see.


    Well, the second link I posted at the top is from today (6th Feb 2020) so this is a new development.

    There are a lot of posts in the "square bases for aos' thread and I haven't had a chance to read them all - 45 pages! - but as I predicted above there are a lot of people saying that 9th age will be able to outcompete WH:TOW.

    9th will only have a place if WH:TOW is a retarded game with AoS-like rules and an incredible amount of dumbing down.

    I suspect that GW hasn't yet decided on the ruleset, but if they go for square bases (hinted) then they will have to have roughly the same movement rules of 8th/9th. The fact that they hinted at square bases makes a huge difference and I didn't see that in my initial post.

    Unless they really f**k things up, I think we will move to ETC-comp for WH:TOW.

    It might be smart for the leadership of 9th to reach out and offer GW help so that the WH:TOW ruleset is as strong as possible. Anyone know if this has been done?
  • Warboss_R'ok wrote:

    I suspect that GW hasn't yet decided on the ruleset, but if they go for square bases (hinted) then they will have to have roughly the same movement rules of 8th/9th.
    Why? Clearly 8th and their big formations failed them before.
    There is little sense in them recreating a similar game.

    The wargaming space has changed a LOT since they started WH, and now games with fewer models and faster play are dominant. 90% of the games played now are skirmish, as are all their games now. So any game they release will follow this trend.
    If they are smart, they are going to use a hybrid system, with small ranked units (16 in 4x4 for example) with skirmish-light rules.

    Warboss_R'ok wrote:

    9th will only have a place if WH:TOW is a retarded game with AoS-like rules and an incredible amount of dumbing down.
    AoS rules are not retarded. They are brilliant! They have skyrocketed GW sell of miniatures and turned a massive profit!!
    oh, you mean for the hard-core players...

    Yeah, they are probably going to suck. And this is based on the main goal of GW, making money. Good balanced games with tons of factions are not profitable enough for the massive investment they require.
    As a company, GW has two option:
    A) implement an unbalanced game that is easy to digest and churns players fast, just as their successful games does (AoS, 40K). It has shown to be the most profitable option and the one that guides all their flagships
    B) As a small specialist game with little support, decent rules and no chance of having 16 factions in it.

    Warboss_R'ok wrote:

    It might be smart for the leadership of 9th to reach out and offer GW help so that the WH:TOW ruleset is as strong as possible. Anyone know if this has been done?
    Why would GW even consider this? The model that T9A proposes is anathema to them. It sells less models even if it gives a better experience to the players.
    Remember, for GW the product are the miniatures. The rules are just a medium to sell them.
    For T9A the rules are the product, and the miniatures are just a medium to play them.
  • Folomo wrote:

    Why? Clearly 8th and their big formations failed them before.
    There is little sense in them recreating a similar game.
    I think you misunderstood me. I mean movement rules where the orientation of a unit matters, where who gets a charge matters, etc, as opposed to skirmish rules where units can just move anywhere they want as long as it's within x''.

    If you have those kind of movement rules then WH:TOW will be similar enough to T9A that one will outcompete the other.


    Folomo wrote:

    implement an unbalanced game

    I think it is pretty much 100% guaranteed that GW will make WH:TOW unbalanced. But some group of players will come out with a comp system for it.

    The question is whether 9th age will be any better than comped WH:TOW.
  • Warboss_R'ok wrote:


    It might be smart for the leadership of 9th to reach out and offer GW help so that the WH:TOW ruleset is as strong as possible. Anyone know if this has been done?


    i agree with @Folomo here.
    they come from Nottingham. their are the Sheriff.
    i feel we are much more like Robin Hood (or Bob Marley).


  • If WH:TOW came out tomorrow with a nice shiny book for O&G, with 3-4 new units we've never seen before, lots of fluffy rules, easy to buy all the models from one place, I think we would see 100,000 orc players go for it and 100 stick with ninth age O&G, which have:

    - no full-art book
    - no fluffy rules
    - no new units
    - hard to collect all the models now
    - no store presence
    - no backstory or fluff that I have seen
    - no epic characters like Skarsnik or Azhag

    O&G is probably the most extreme case, but that really drives home the point about how easy it would be for GW to take all the O&G players back, and then some.

    I should add the caveat that GW could cancel WH:TOW, or they could really mess it up rules-wise.
  • Warboss_R'ok wrote:

    I mean movement rules where the orientation of a unit matters, where who gets a charge matters, etc, as opposed to skirmish rules where units can just move anywhere they want as long as it's within x''.
    Warmachine is a game with a "flank" bonus and where who charges matters a LOT. It also is a skirmish.

    So unit orientation and charges mattering can be (and has been) easily included in a skirmish game.

    not trying to be obtuse, just clarifying that square bases doesn't mean 8th edition formations or Rank&File play-style.

    Warboss_R wrote:

    I think it is pretty much 100% guaranteed that GW will make WH:TOW unbalanced. But some group of players will come out with a comp system for it.
    Yes, and three years ago this would have been a clear result.
    But after 5 years of playing a well balanced game, I think the amount of players willing to play a Frankenstein game such as 8th + TOW. Tournament players adoption will be much much lower than when the old world had just recently exploded and players hadn't had the chance to play a fair game. Adoption will be specially hard for the tournament scene, were skill is supposed to matter the most, more than having the most recent OP unit GW released.

    I think the main place were T9A may/will lose ground is actually the fluff & garage players, were the advantages of T9A (fair games, good rules, skills dependent results) matter much less than having a game with shiny new miniatures with metal background, good advertising and easy access.

    Warboss_R wrote:

    If WH:TOW came out tomorrow with a nice shiny book for O&G...
    But it won't. No chance at all. The time window for just the base game is 2 to 3 years!
    There is a much higher chance that the O&G players get a new full book for T9A than from GW.
    Specially with GW notorious obsession with chaos :P .

    The post was edited 4 times, last by Folomo ().

  • Warboss_R wrote:

    If WH:TOW came out tomorrow with a nice shiny book for O&G, with 3-4 new units we've never seen before, lots of fluffy rules, easy to buy all the models from one place...
    Here's what I think we can expect:

    Smaller factions part of greater alliances, like in AoS. And given that this is not a main game like AoS, probably not at all as many unique models. In fact, what I think is likely is that they'll want the main models to be from AoS and then give you some special characters and units from the Old World lore.

    So for OnG we'll probably see Grimgor and a special unit of body guard Orcs or something like that, along with some a few old favourites like the Git Launcher but more than likely all done in the same style and scale as AoS.


    I base this off the announcement blog where they state:

    "The Old World is to Warhammer Age of Sigmar, as the Horus Heresy is to Warhammer 40,000."
    My wife and I just released our first video game title!
  • GW enforces the 'our game our models' policy which isn't for me anymore after seeing the freedom that 9th age offers.

    Most of us are castaways from Warhammer so I understand the desire to get back to the embrace of good old GW. :)

    There are market for other fantasy rulesets though. Oathmark is one such system which is released in April. I'm much more hyped about that than this revival of old world.

    Since the beginning of 9th age there has been an undercurrent that this game should somehow grow to the size that warhammer was. Which is unrealistic as we don't have the resources to push the game like GW does. Best possible ruleset with any model people want to use is our strength over GW.

    GW has revived their older systems in previous years and necromunda at least looks to be better than it's previous incarnations. With that in mind it's interesting to see what they cook up for Warhammer. They announced to produce new models at least so that's always a plus. :)
    All things wargaming. My super entertaining hobby blog where anything wargaming related can happen.

    "I heard a television interviewer once suggest that the use of dice made battlegaming on par with Snakes and Ladders and such like games of change. Well, he was being just stupid, or trying to take a rise out of his guest. It is in fact the imponderable which does give reality to 'Battle' and, as we shall see, does cause the players to make proper allowance for the unlikely or even seemingly impossible, which, as we read, did happen surprisingly frequently in the annals of war."
    -Charles Grant
  • I don't know why I keep let myself get drawn back into this...I will be posting on every gee dub crumb... ;)

    I agree with several points here- particularly the 'if GW was good at WFB rules we would still be playing them'.

    Personally I think:

    a) GW is good at making models and writing stories. GW is bad at writing rules.
    b) t9A is good at writing rules, bad at selling models and stories.

    GW getting back into WFB is more likely to be complimentary than competitive.