They did WHAT to Warhammer Fantasy?

>They did WHAT to Warhammer Fantasy?
Check out the 9th age. It's basically what I'm doing.

The people I knew who had warhammer fantasy armies never went to game shops to play.
They played at home.

Everyone i know ignores it, there is a small amount of people who plays it on the local club but everyone else still sticks to regular fantasy.

Reminder that 9th age is badly written fan fiction.

Reminder you couldn't do any better

That's why you don't write any. Nice trips.

>That's why *I* don't write any
Fify ;•}

They decided that marketing towards children is better than pleasing their existing fan base. Maybe they will or are making a good profit off of it, but that doesn't change the fact that the game is bad. I don't think that anything will really get fixed.

If you actually play WHFB with buddies and want to move to something actively supported, try a clone like 9th Age or Kings of War. If you are looking into the game from a newbies perspective, don't. It has no future.

It's still better than AoS

>no future
Constant releases and updates
>9th age
Played by nobody outside scattered groups of neckbeards that last purchased a miniature when GW releases their first plastic kit.

age of sigmar is more fun than whfb imo

whfb was dying, this was a merciful death

Even if the game gets new content, that doesn't mean that all of that content isn't utter shit, specifically in the case of Age of Sigmar.

9th age is just a "fixed" version of 8th. Polishing a turd.

I love seeing funny shit like this because we had ZERO sales number for WHFB. Yes, it did not sell well, I did say though that it needed a shake up. The End Times could have provided that but instead of moving the story forward and maybe trampling on a few toes they just decided to cut everybody's toes off and crash the setting.

With no survivors

Thank you.

And you'd still have a shitstorm if they shook things up.

Knocking army sizes back to when they were smaller or making them even smaller than that alone would have frustrated all the people who stuck around and spent both the time and money to paint ookabooka number of Spearmen or Skeleton Warriors because the rules demanded that in the average 2500-3000 point games you spend at least 25% of those points on the aforementioned.

What I think is kind of funny is that for everyone heaping praises on 8th Edition, it supposedly caused a lot of people to leave meaning that all that remained where the diehards.

Just curious, what exactly is bad about it?

I've seen some people bring up legitimate points that I can agree with, but then also see or have the feeling people are saying bad when they really mean that they don't like that the game is no longer rank and file.

How do you fix 8th then?

Honestly sometimes you can't fix things and should just just start over from scratch.

Even 40k is supposedly starting to lose players and I think that may be because the game aspect of it is no longer satisfying compared to the competition available. To my knowledge both 40k and Fantasy basically just built on the same existing structures they've had since the beginning, just removing or adding things.

Why do people still cling to a broken system? How did it get supporters in the first place if it was a broken system?

Lore and models have done a lot to prop up the ailing rules and the competition may fail in one or both of those areas.

As for how 40k and Fantasy even got attention in the first place, besides what I said above there may not really have been any competition, in fantasy and space fantasy/science fiction at least.

Fait say they have sources that says that Fantasy solid less than paint.

And there is also public sources that WHFB were 30% of GW revenue before ET.

>Roundtree does his best
He is the same kind of people as Kirby.

Reminder that with the ghb it's actually a good game.

Does slamming the moon into the planet count as a wake?
Part of the issue is that Games Workshop killed the old setting how THEY wanted to.
Chaos won, damn the results.

Nope it's still bad skirmish.

>The Sigmar Defence Force will be here momentarily to claim they're correcting me.

Well, if it 'backfired on them horrifically', why does the playerbase seem to be growing rather than shrinking?

because it's not growing as fast as it could have.

GW is staying afloat only thanks to videogame licenses if you didn't notice.

>a notorious clickbait is saying someone close to someone else has assumed a certain set of percentages came from inside GW, despite not being actually told so and the percentages lacking context.

>GW is staying afloat only thanks to videogame licenses if you didn't notice.

Proof?

No, there wasn't.

>My frustration starts with page 1, which summarises Games Workshop's performance in the year to April 2016. The table reveals that revenue has fallen marginally. Profit derived from that revenue has fallen 27%. Games Workshop sells fantasy miniatures, collectibles and models for its Warhammer universes, which people assemble, paint, collect, and use to play wargames.

>The overall result is no disaster, though. A dramatic surge from an additional source of income, royalty payments, came to Games Workshop's rescue. Computer game designers license the Warhammer characters and mythology to use in games they design and market.

iii.co.uk/articles/344389/can-we-trust-board-healthy-games-workshop

Denial

Then provide proof.

Google Chapter House materials.

Already did months back. Can't find the 30% figure.

But one of the best features of warhammer is the stat-line, throwing that away was a mistake..

Bearing in mind, you need to remember to include the money GW spent creating and marketing the new game. AoS made more than Fantasy did the year prior (granted, that wasn't that hard, and things like panic buying, people getting last prints etc would have contributed to that)

>AoS made more than Fantasy did the year prior
Proofs?

>> tfw just found out about this

not you fucking didnt
you've been peddling this shit every day, 'pisskicker'

The same report that said The percentage of profit from AoS was about the same as Fantasy, but AoS had more money spent on it, since it was it's opening year.

The latest report said it accounts for 35% of their earnings this year apparently

>Yeah 90% of GW's customer base hated this
Of the small subset that gave a shit about WHFB.

Also do you count as a customer if you bought all of your minis a decade ago and refuse to buy any more?

>The same report that said #
Link please. Because if we are talking about summer report there is no real numbers of AoS sales.

>Of the small subset that gave a shit about WHFB
Yeah that's why 40k general was so glad about ET-perspective.

>Protested? Appealed? Wished to complain in the Strongest Possible terms?

Kinda?

Everyone just left GW. Only a tiny fraction of WHFB's players remained to play AoS and the game isn't growing in terms of player base.

>The table reveals that revenue has fallen marginally. Profit derived from that revenue has fallen 27%.

>Revenue, on the other hand, is dependent on Games Workshop, and it fell in the previous two financial years as well.

>Page 10 contains a little more detail. Games Workshop opened 48 new stores and closed 13, lifting the total number by 10%, yet retail sales fell 1.3%. Excluding sales from the new stores, retail sales fell 4.4%. Trade sales to independent hobby stores increased 0.1% and mail order sales fell 1.8%. A note on page 42 shows that retail sales are most significant, closely followed by trade sales, with mail order contributing just over 20%.

AoS is totes doing fine guys.

What the report says is 'we finished the year with sales of Warhammer: Age of Sigmar at a higher rate than Warhammer has enjoyed for several years'.

This is massively ambiguous financial speak though. They do not specifically state whether they are referring to revenue, profit, number of boxes sold, and exactly which time periods they are comparing. It certainly suggests that things may be looking up for AoS, but we can't judge much from that statement.

Overall GW have suffered a serious decline in profit from actual model sales, but have been propped up by licensing (Warhammer Total War likely being a big part of that). I don't believe they have any debts, and they're still making profit, so they're hardly circling the drain. What they describe as their core business continues the decline seen over many years however.

>and they're still making profit,
They still didn't recovered from 30% drop in 2013

>Excluding sales from the new stores, retail sales fell 4.4%.

Wait, so they ignore the 48 new stores, so they are looking at a loss of 13 stores less revenue. If 48 new stores- 13 less stores, so adding 35 stores, is an increase of 10% then the 4.4% fall in retail sales is pretty much explained away by the 13 less stores.

Its not supporting or conflicting anything else, I just thought that that was a dumb statement as only taking account of the sales with LESS stores will of course yield a negative number.

Besides, the argument that GW's decline is ONLY on the shoulders of AoS is stupid, Warhammer 40k has been doing worse as well ever since they gave up tournaments and game balance entirely.

I would say that the first year of AoS was a complete failure, but with the General's Handbook, points and GW's new commitment to community interaction we really need to see their numbers a year or two after this summer for the most part.

Its anecdotal, but there was no scene for that game before the Handbook, now most of my hobby stores have game groups easily as large as their warmachine and infinity crowds. The Handbook seems to have mattered to players, whether they are new players who actually BUY the new stuff or are merely just old Warhammerfags brought back to play their models I don't fully know.

>Besides, the argument that GW's decline is ONLY on the shoulders of AoS is stupid, Warhammer 40k has been doing worse as well ever since they gave up tournaments and game balance entirely.

It´s possible but as GW never releases their actual sales data we can only speculate how AOS is doing compared to 40K. But historically 40K has done better then fantasy according to rumors and I doubt that has changed in any dramatic way.

>tfw mike simpson, lusty jack and the old TWCenter guard are keeping warhammer fantasy alive.
>tfw one of their community guys said during a stream that bretonnia would live forever.

>and GW's new commitment to community interaction
The moment AoS has become stable it will be dropped like a hot potato.

Either AoS has been a massive flop so far, 40K has been doing considerably worse, or a combination of the two.

Even if AoS has been doing ok, and 40K poorly, this may be due in part to AoS however.

AoS may cannabilise 40k sales if 40k gamers move to AoS.

GW have focused heavily on AoS releases, and as most sales are made close to the release of a box, producing AoS releases at the expense of 40k may have lowered profits from 40k.

As ever, we have so little data and can't tell much from the report except that GW are still profitable, but that profits are flat or in decline, and supported increasingly by licensing rather than their core business of selling models.

>Everyone saying AoS is a flop that sucks balls and is going to kill GW
>Meanwhile at the GW near me and every other LGS around they can't keep the models on the shelves and more people play it than 40k now.
Where the fuck are you people getting your information from?

>AoS may cannibalize 40k sales if 40k gamers move to AoS.
As long as players are purchasing the relative same amount of product that shouldn't effect overall revenue.

>GW have focused heavily on AoS releases, and as most sales are made close to the release of a box, producing AoS releases at the expense of 40k may have lowered profits from 40k.

I would argue that both systems have been receiving the same amount of support. Both 40k and AoS have moved to a new system of releasing faction based forces with smaller model sets and single rulebooks for them.

AoS has had:
Sylvanneth
IronJaws
Flesheaters
Stormcast Extremis

40K has had:
Harlequins
Mechanicum
Deamonkin
Imperial Knights
Deathwatch

These are a new business strategy. Instead of just releasing a new Codex Space Marines with Deathwatch rules they flat out add the entire army into the game, same with Harlequins and Deamonkin. To buyers these are smaller army ranges for purchase and thus seems designed to encourage buyers to get the models, then, as there is no more to buy, look to other releases and ranges for their purchases.

Whether is works or not remains to be seen. We already can assume the Supplement system didn't generate much in terms of sales as they are for the most part gone, so this is the new tactic.

No where but a financial report. Anything you say will be called anecdotal, anything they retort back will also be. Its all irrelevant because no one really has the facts except GW, and they are not sharing.

In my area its doing perfectly fine, but to people that disagree they will simply call it an exception to the norm, which they hold is that the game is a complete failure.

Granted I've never played old WHF or AoS so maybe I'm just less bias to one way or the other.

What are IronJews and what is their burning temp ?

Roundtree is accountant. Sure, he has zero attachment to the product / lore / history. He might as well be running shoe company and it would make no difference to him. But he knows basic principles of running business.
Kirby was delusional egomaniac. He might have had attachment to the product, but zero connection with reality.

>Kirby was delusional egomaniac. He might have had attachment to the product, but zero connection with reality.

Kirby´s only attachment was to his already fat wallet.

because their all new players
most of the old players left and/or just play 7th ed.

RAISE THE PRICES

>oh boy another mediocre skirmish game

You are entitled to your opinion but nobody other than GW stockholders asked for this or wanted another skirmish game with bad rules in a bad setting with even less stakes and life than warhammer or 40k universes.

At least whfb had a niche as the king of rank and file fantasy. AoS is generic aside from how many people is losses off.

The best thing about AoS was it caused a lot of people who don't even play the game to jump ship to x-wing/warmachine/infinity at my LCS. It was so offensive and bad it turned people off of GW in general. That is fucking impressive

While I question how true this claim is, even if it is this is not necessarily a bad thing in the long run is it? New players mean a healthier GW community, since no new blood means an inevitable player decline as the old guard slowly moves away from the game.

>At least whfb had a niche as the king of rank and file fantasy. AoS is generic aside from how many people is losses off.

Here is the core thing that limits AoS' reach: if I am going to do battle with fantasy armies, I want it to be more or less standard fantasy armies. There is a point where it is too removed from Tolkien for me to care about. AoS has crossed that line. WFB has managed to stay inside.

>bad rules
Amusingly, while this is constantly parroted, AoS as it is now is more balanced that where Fantasy left of. Certainly far more balanced than 40K right now, which is why a lot of my local tournament communities are jumping from 40K to AoS.

Not a grand feat, seeing that Fantasy was a victim of over a decade of mismanagement in rules department. 40k has been on the same road pretty much as long.

>the rules are good because they're better than any other gw rules!

Play some stuff outside of the GW bubble. The best smelling turd is still a turd.

I don't even mean that as a snide thing. Really, go get a demo of anything else on the market right now. Warmahordes is super fair, Malifaux has a cool card system, x-wing is fast and tactical, it's kind of almost your turn in Infinity, Frostgrave is like a balanced version of mordheim. Shit, give Mordheim a go. It's rules aren't balanced but it's fun as fuck. Try gorkamorka and necromunda too. Try anything other than the current GW staple. I know it's a matter of taste but I almost guarantee you that you'll find the AoS has nothing of value in its rules.

>Warmahordes is super fair
kekMemeAtBest

The rest is spot on

>New players mean a healthier GW community
Nope. Look at 40k community.

>But he knows basic principles of running business.
Nope, he still don't realise that wargames are niche industry and he really afraid video games.

Like what - what should i play - name 3 good games

> Fait

I just named like 8 but okay. What do you want out of a game? Cause they can all give you the basics dice rolling and modeling.

Our group is very happy using Kings of War.

AoS has shown that you can throw away and do fine.

The only good thing the stat line does is stroke simulation a little bit, but being limited to the numbers 1-10 means there is little that can really be done and every starts feeling the same. The charts for rolling to hit and rolling to wound are so limited that you're better off just giving a unit concrete numbers and having modifiers.

The stat system in game like Warmachine, Hordes, and Infinity is better because those games go up to number 20 and above, meaning that the stats actually play something of a role. They don't rely on charts either. Warmachine and Hordes is rolling equal to or above a certain number and in Infinity you're trying to roll under a number, if I recall correctly.

Because they are chicken littles who think GW is seriously going to radically change their best selling IP's lore when it's still doing relatively well.

Fantasy would have stuck around if hadn't been doing piss poorly and possibly wasn't as obviously derivative as it was.

False, by various accounts he was actually a gamer.

This possibly lends credence to the idea that gamers can make terrible business people because they're set on doing things in a certain way.

Given the fact that smaller sized games are seemingly everything that is out there nowadays, I'd call that a demand.

The problem with catering to a niche is that you actually have to make a return to warrant your investment. There is no point in investing a lot of time and money into something that doesn't even break even for you. I'm guessing that is what happened with Fantasy and possibly why in the years leading up to the end the releases for it were sporadic while 40k got the most attention as the golden goose.

>Faeit

Remember the Nigmos, brotha?

And...isn't it a good thing when a setting isn't moving? It's good to have stories within the setting, the hinting of more, but it's supposed to be a place for your story to take place in.

Imagine if another game had a setting that people liked as it was, but then they suddenly destroyed it in a relatively short time and replaced it with something that felt vague and unsubstantial with little tie to your old setting that you liked, beyond carrying over a lot of the same units.

No, it's not always good when a setting remains stagnant because it has an arbitrary stopping point because that means nothing of any real merit can occur. Thus if you're trying to remain in the present you have to hope that what you're currently writing is enjoyable and not just passable. So far this has seemingly been the case with GW's campaigns where the writing isn't anything outstanding and people are only looking for little snippets or major changes.

The only people who like settings remaining stagnant are those fear that any change will be for the worse and those who have fun writing their own little stories. Both fail to realize that the setting officially advancing doesn't stop them from fucking off and doing their own thing.

I think the latter also don't realize that there are a lot of people who don't give a damn about original and creating their own stuff. They take an interest in certain characters or even stuff like a SM Chapter or Craftworld and are perfectly fine devouring anything new written about them, only pitching a fit when they feel like the new material isn't as good as the old or completely retcons it. See people getting mad when the Clan Raukaan supplement seemingly changed the Chapter structure of the Iron Hands from what it apparently was as laid out in the Index Astartes article about them.

But I like having a lot of room for original things. It's half of the appeal of both 40k and WFB, since so much is left not fleshed out.

Might not be the appropriate thread to ask, so redirect me if I'm wrong. But as a new player is it frowned upon to go to an lgs and ask to watch or run through a practice game with someone army? So I can get a game or two under my belt before I decide if I like the game under my belt, watching videos is interesting enough but I'd like to be sure before I spend cash. I'm no stranger to collectibles and I know better than to manhandle people's stuff obviously .

>granted, that wasn't that hard, and things like panic buying, people getting last prints etc would have contributed to that)

Not really

Atia, who is pretty much the best current rumor source for GW as a whole, has said that the so called panic buying didn't really amount to much because there wasn't much product in the first place.

There were plastic kits among the Fantasy stuff that was discontinued, but quite a bit of it was also clampacks.

Advancing a setting does not mean every nook and cranny getting filled in. A stagnant setting is actually more of a threat to that since eventually you're going to run out of the present time to do things in and thus possibly have to look to the past.

GW has already begun doing this with the Horus Heresy and The Beast Arises. Once the Horus Heresy is finished they will probably move on to the Scouring which followed.

The Scouring came after the Heresy, but I get your point. Though I imagine GW would move on to the Age of Apostasy instead.

I meant to say that the Scouring followed the Heresy, which is why they'd wait for the aforementioned to finish.

I don't recall GW proper saying anything about it, but I recall it being said that FW stated they were going to do the Scouring. Really no reason for them not to considering it's sort of just a continuation of Space Marines versus Space Marines present in the Heresy. Big difference being that the Loyalists now have the upper hand while the Traitors are on the back foot, warped by Chaos, and possibly fighting each just as much as they do the Imperium.

There's also the fact that you can more legitimately fluff out Imperials vs Imperials - zealous Frateris Templars versus rebellious regiments of Imperial Guard, the Sisters of Battle taking the fight to Space Marines with Vandire himself watching the proceeding battle, the armies of Forge Worlds being cowed into submission by Stormtrooper raids and Knight Houses more loyal to the Ecclisearchy than the Mechancius.

It became stable a year ago.

...

I'm not sure if you can consider a wargame 'stable' after only a year or two, and that's true of any wargame, not just bias against AoS. Most anything made in the last few years is pretty young still, even after an edition or two.

>sometimes you roll 2d6 below stat, sometimes 1d6 abpve, sometimes 1d6 below, sometimes 1d6 and consult a chart

The statline was not a good feature. It was a holdover from the days when everything needed its own mechanic.

>their best selling IP's lore when it's still doing relatively well.
It's still dying since FFG stealing casual market from 40k.

>Atia
Into the thrash.

The Apostasy is one of the big events I could see them covering.

X-Wing may not be necessarily stealing and the movies may be playing a role.

Even still, X-Wing should be a wake up call that GW has to try and improve in other areas if they're vehemently opposed to going the prepainted and minimal assembly route.

She's a consistently reliable source.