Friday, November 6, 2009

WFB- on 8th Edition..

Rumors are flying of late regarding the release of an 8th Edition for Warhammer Fantasy Battles. Ques from the Skaven book, various insiders at the usual haunts all seem to point to or back up some things I have posted previously. The rules amendment, I've talked about here. Is apparently a whole new edition. with a new starter set (Empire and Orcs) with new models (new Empire Knights and Boar Boyz) followed new books for both armies, also the Summer Campaign that's been talked about seems to be on track as well.

There has been zero official talk about "what" rules will be changed with exception of "changes to Cavalry" , there are rumors about scoring changes floating about including ending "pitched battles" as the standard format and moving toward objective based games ala 40k.

General opinion in my area is mixed because most folks I play with think the current the rules are good, its the army books that have gone astray. That being the case it's easier and less confusing to to fix the rules to meet some of the inbalance of the books than it is to release FAQ's for all the books not to mention a new edition meets GW's current sales cycle.

Some of the changes talked about here that we'd like to see all boil around the principle of getting Warhammer back to be about fighting with armies and not about overspecialized units or characters, we all want to see armies on the table and not see people be able tweak the army books to come up with 35 models army's at 2000 or worse 2250 points. I'd like to see caps on allowed shooting and power dice per army,and get away from power gaming individual phases and pushing thing toward more balanced armies. Psychology also needs some kind of overhaul, getting rid of immune to psychology as a blanket effect and fine tuning the effects of panic, fear and terror would be a good start. Hopefully GW will push to continue to make WFB and 40K different games and not the same game with two different themes which is fear some people semm to have, from the looks of things we'll have alot of things Warhammer to talk about this summer..

From what we know the 2010 WFB schedule looks like so far...with no exact times known

Beast of Chaos- Book/ Models
Tomb Kings- Book/ Models

8th Edition-Book
WFB starter set- New Models

Summer Campaign

Orcs and Goblins- New Army Book
Empire- New Army Book

This leaves Bretonians, Ogres, Wood Elves and Dwarfs in line for new 8th Ed books for 2011, Speculate away,


Disorderlies Tyrant said...

Don't forget Chaos Dwarfs!

John@Plastic Legions said...

actually, that's being put out by Forge World..with an "Imperial Armor" type book, with new models..should be very cool, until them the Indy GT Chaos Dwarf PDF is getting pretty widely accepted!

Conspyre said...

I wouldn't count on seeing those changes. The difference between Warhammer and a historical game IS heroes and magic, and the same way the newer 40K codicies have been emphasizing that it's not a modern game with bigger tanks, the WHFB army books have been continuing to emphasize the "gee whiz" factor. All is not lost, however. Getting (mostly) rid of the generic line-em-up and knock-em-down games in 40K have saved a lot of weaker forces, as the most smashy unit is not always the most useful. The sooner the plain Pitched Battle goes away, the better for Warhammer.

Balancing every army is impossible. Five year army book updates mean the scale fluctuates, and the "update everyone at once" theory is just as bad. Psychology is skewed, due to the overwhelming effects of Fear, however with a few key exceptions, I don't think ItP is overused, so long as people remember that it DOES have negative ramifications.

Limiting power dice and shooting effectiveness is an interesting debate. Additional power dice do little good if there are no extra spells to cast them on- the issue here I think is not so much the number of dice available, as the armies that are gaining additional, frequently devastating spells without taking up a spell slot (Vampire Counts, I'm looking at you bastards). Limiting number of shooters, on the other hand, changes the way the game is played rather dramatically, but in an extremely predictable manner- armies with that much firepower are exceptionally brittle, and require very specific builds to counter. Personally, I don't believe in limiting that kind of force, as they're so far into one-trick pony territory, that in any kind of mission-based scenario, they're likely to get hit pretty hard.

I should really save these novels for my own blog posts...

Nathan said...

I'm all for a revamping of cav. They are the aspect of fantasy that i think looks the most visually appealing, but you don't get to see that much of it. Moving the battles to a more scenario type would be interesting, though i think the overall outcome would depend on the conditions.

ZeroTwentythree said...

"General opinion in my area is mixed because most folks I play with think the current the rules are good, its the army books that have gone astray."

I agree with this 100%.

Well, almost 100% Magic is maybe the one exception. They've never seemed to get it completely right.

I'm sure the game could do with some minor tweaks to the basics of the game. But other than that, any major overhaul seems like changing rules for the sake of changing rules. Or fixing something that's not broken.

Who knows. There's not been much solid info yet, so we'll have to wait and see.

"Balancing every army is impossible."

Agreed. But the problem is that it seems like they didn't even bother to try in some cases. The can at least make an effort. They rally did a great job with 6th edition. Even some of the 7th edition stuff -- even if I don't like the direction they've taken -- balances pretty well. But it's those glaring cases where they just didn't seem to think/care that really keep 7th from being an improvement over 6th, in my opinion.

ahschmidt said...

Well, I agree with y'all about a lot of this. I REALLY hope that the changes to the rules are pretty small tweaks here and there... hearing anything that smacks of it becoming like 40k sends chills through my spine, and makes me vomit a little. I think the game is quite solid, especially considering that the core rules have changed very little since 1982, or whenever. Trying to get the game to trend away from toy-hammer might be a good thing, but I wonder how likely that is. Look at all the new big plastic kits that GW is putting out... these sucker sell these days I am sure. The only rumor I have heard was that the super-template effect that the new Skaven enjoy will likely become a game-wide change. It will be interesting to see what comes of it.

ZeroTwentythree said...

"The only rumor I have heard was that the super-template effect that the new Skaven enjoy will likely become a game-wide change. It will be interesting to see what comes of it."

Me too. I'm calling that one "the solution to the problem that never existed."

Like someone in the design studio said, "hey, what are we going to do about all this infantry? Is there some way we can kill it off even quicker?"

I would disagree about it not changing since 1982. I have fond memories of 3rd edition. But it was really a pretty different game. A bit more involved, which I liked. But I also appreciate that they really streamlined things. For me, even as an old-timer, 6th edition really ranks high. 7th edition core rules seemed OK, though fleeing and a few other things are awkward. But while the rules are generally ROCK SOLID, it's honestly the army lists that need the work.


blogger templates | Make Money Online