BoLS Lounge : Wargames, Warhammer & Miniatures Forum
Page 3 of 121 FirstFirst 123451353103 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 1201
  1. #21

    Default

    I refuse to believe that GW will ever outright invalidate army/codex books with an edition change again. It simply isn't good business. It would also mean that the rules would change so massively that old rules don't function any more, and I don't think that they would perform a wholesale reset of the game again. I think there are elements of the previous editions that need to come back to create the right mix, but they are doing that slowly with 40K now without resetting the game. The best solution is to get as close as possible, make one or two armies with old books crap in the game, and if necessary, release WD lists to kill off a book that just doesn't work(like with Codex:Witchhunters).

  2. #22
    Chapter-Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Derventium
    Posts
    5,532

    Default

    Is it just me or do we not already have an 'armies of Warhammer' in the rule book? That big list of every available unit along with stats at the back of the book? Doesn't seem particularly innovative to me.
    Chief Educator of the Horsemen of Derailment "People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought, which they avoid." SOREN KIERKEGAARD

  3. #23

    Default

    I don't see why these rumors are so far fetched. They only state that the previous softcovers will be invalidated and by that time there will only be three books in softcover if the rumor schedule has everything properly placed (Skaven, Wood Elves, and Beastmen). At the rate GW is releasing books we'd probably see all three of those released within 6-9 months of 9th edition dropping.

    I'm more concerned about the rumors for the rules that state 9th edition will be more streamlined. Given how streamlined 8th is compared to 7th... I'm uncertain how they can be streamlined much more. I also don't like the loss of special rules and the lack of supplements like those found in 40k would be disappointing as it opens up many of the niche army lists that we've missed like Kislev, Dogs of War, etc.
    Armies - Skaven, Tomb Kings, Eldar, Iron Snakes, Dark Eldar, Retribution, & Legion
    Blog - http://chronowraith.blogspot.com

  4. #24
    Fly Lord
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Austin, Texas, United States
    Posts
    3,435

    Default

    Jeremy Vetock got chatted up moons ago and said that a lot of the game mechanic ideas used in War of the Ring (actually a really solid rules system) were intended for a cleaner 21st century version of Fantasy. But the decision was made to go in a different direction and we got 8th Edition.

    I would invite anyone with a copy to open up 8th and WotR side by side and compare the basic rule mechanics of each major turn phase. There are a lot of interesting things in WotR that I think could widen the appeal of WFB.

    In particular I'm a big fan of WotR's movement phase. It opens up the game a lot with much more wide ranging maneuvering, while keeping it clean and fast paced.

    All the fiddly rules for moving in WFB that have been around since the 80s are perhaps my least favorite thing about the whole system. It's a real challenge to get new players over. Of course the whole needing a slide-rule to calculate WFB combat resolution needs a solution as well.

    -L
    Got some Juicy News? Email BoLS

  5. #25

    Default

    There isn't that much of a difference to be honest.

    However, Fantasy is all about the manoeuvres. Main change was to charging. As long as you roll the minimum distance between the two units, the charge completes, with free movement as needed.

    And combat res is easy! Up to +3 from ranks. +1 for unit standard. +1 for Army standard. Then one for every wound caused. Loser takes a break test with a negative modifier equal to the combat res difference, unless they have more ranks, in which case they are stubborn and suffer no modifier. Dead easy!

    Overall, I very much agree WoTR is a truly excellent rules set. However, it's very simplicity makes it ill suited to a Warhammer adaptation. The spells are too subtle (not a bad thing in itself!) and the monsters too easily slain.

    I heartily recommend anyone to give it a bash though!
    Last edited by Mr Mystery; 09-03-2013 at 01:10 PM.
    Fed up for Scalpers? https://www.facebook.com/groups/1710575492567307/?ref=bookmarks

  6. #26
    Chapter-Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Derventium
    Posts
    5,532

    Default

    As someone who has never played WotR (and has no intention too) can someone highlight what I am missing?
    Chief Educator of the Horsemen of Derailment "People demand freedom of speech to make up for the freedom of thought, which they avoid." SOREN KIERKEGAARD

  7. #27
    Brother-Sergeant
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Stage Select
    Posts
    62

    Default

    As someone who has never played WotR (and has no intention too) can someone highlight what I am missing?
    Same here.

    8th edition has its flaws, though nothing that isn't easily houseruled, but it is at least a game of Fantasy Battles rather than Overly Technical Fantasy Skirmishes.
    Agreed. Am I the only one that hopes they get through all the books before they turn the edition? I don't know why people are still pushing the "8th edition sucks" stuff. I mean fantasy will never sell like 40K or space marines, but it is a solid rule set. The switch from 7th to 8th was desperately needed to correct the issues created by the Demon, Vampire and Dark Elf books. 8th just needs a few tweaks. I think the huge spells and cannons could be toned down slightly, and you could fix steadfast by counting all the ranks in a combat, instead of going unit by unit, but neither issue really bothers me that much. I admit I would be a bit disappointed if they did a complete overhaul. I would love to actually see a complete edition since all of the new fantasy books are pretty well done save for a handful of items.

  8. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eldargal View Post
    I believe what Harry and Hastings say, so 9th in 2015 and more than just tweaking 8th. Until they say something abotu dropping all army books and a Ravening Hordes type set up then I'm burying that under a mountain of salt.
    I'm with the EldarGal on this one, I can't see them putting out some uber books, special editions and all and then going 'TROLLOLOL reset!' In addition my guesses for starter set are some combo of wood elves, brettonians or beastmen. I'm thinking brets and wood elves but if they want a clear good and bad wood elves and beastmen.

    Some sort of buff to cavalry - such as 1 rank being disruptive when they charge (so great on the flank charge but afterwards not so much) Slight nerf to cannons perhaps.

  9. #29

    Default

    COMPLETE CONJECTURE:::::

    One reason they could decide to complete all 8th Ed books, yet make them invalid in 9th Ed is that some people, finding 9th too radical a change, could opt to maintain their games/leagues at an 8thEd ruleset. GW would still sell minis, they just would not support the rulebooks and army books anymore. Take 8th if you want, as is, no warranty. Just maybe.

  10. #30
    Battle-Brother
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Triplex Phall
    Posts
    43

    Default

    Now that sounds like suicide for WFB.
    However. IF they produce a crapy 9th edition we will keep the 8th in use in our club.
    The machine knows all. Praise the Omnissiah!
    WFB: Dark elves, Skaven Clan Mors, Nippon. HH and 40k: Adeptus Mechanicus.

Page 3 of 121 FirstFirst 123451353103 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •