Subscribe Us

header ads

New Warhammer Rumors and Round Bases Spotted in New Skaven Packs


Warhammer Fantasy is right around the corner, and this little rumor bit has the new edition being released June 20th... right after Space Marines it would seem. 6 Factions, picking up right after the End Times, and two games in one... skirmish and full scale.

Did I mention Round Bases have been spotted in "just received" clampacks of Skaven? There are pics below of just received new fantasy models from Games Workshop.

(note the above pic was from the Warhammer World Grand Opening where round bases were also seen)

Please remember that these are rumors. Even the images right now should be considered rumors until we see more.

via Bird in the Trees posted by Larry Vela on Bols
http://www.belloflostsouls.net/2015/05/wfb-9th-latest-game-overview.html
– WFB 9th is simply called “Warhammer’
– New rules provide for two games in one:

a) A small scale game with few models
b) A full scale game like the previous WFB

– The small scale game has heavy limitations on models that can be used such as exotic units and units that would be unbalancing at a small scale.

– Triple book format with rules and history split up ~Editor, this sounds like the current 40K format
– Round bases
– June 20th
– 6 Factions
– Game picks up after the End Times series, taking it into account.




Round Bases have been spotted-
here is the link if you need to go see it yourself.
http://boards.4chan.org/tg/thread/40086150/got-my-grey-seer-in-my-order-do-you-think-this-is


via posters on 4chan showing round bases in their recent orders they have received.
Got my grey seer in my order










Hey, just got my guttrot spume model today, a round 40mm came in the pack. Judging by recent photos and leaks i might as well put him on the supplied round base in preparation for 9th ed.

Post a Comment

64 Comments

  1. i can't wait to use my daemons for the new warhammer ;)

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't think I'm going to rebate my Skaven or WoC...but I am excited by skirmish mode.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rebase. Not rebate, not renssalear. Rebase spellcheck.

      Delete
  3. " WFB 9th is simply called “Warhammer’ "

    It's ALWAYS been "just" Warhammer.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No it hasn't. You just said it yourself.

      It has ALWAYS been "Warhammer Fantasy Battles" just like "Warhammer 40,000" is not called 40K.

      It will not officially be JUST "Warhammer," not Warhammer Fantasy Battles. You can call it whatever the hell you want, but just because everyone called it "Pink and Red Jumpy Jumps" doesn't make it the official name.

      Delete
    2. No, at least in the UK it's just called Warhammer. There is literally nothing on their website, in white dwarfs or in the rules itself that title the game as Warhammer fantasy

      Delete
    3. The fantasy battle part comes from the tag line at the bottom of the rule book, witch is why a lot of people keep adding it to the games name.
      It is, always has been and always will be Warhammer. Nothing more nothing less.

      Delete
    4. to be fair some of the earlier warhammer edition's had "fantasy" emblazoned underneath the word "warhammer". mainly box art has "Warhammer" and a small "fantasy" this is where the confusion comes from. as others have said it has always been called warhammer, but to differentiate between 40k and fantasy people made a distinction to help those that don't play understand the difference beside one has guns and aliens and one has spells and knights....the two sorta blending/melding would confuse people. hence we call it WHFB and WH40K/40k.

      Delete
  4. I think giving both base types is the way to go.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I hope my dwarfs come back

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. so do i. my stunties are now slaves under new edition if some harsh rumor is true. though i do want to see new models, i still would like to see some support for the dwarves. if it is more steam punk then so be it.

      Delete
  6. ~shrugs~ Destroying the gaming world I actually loved was always going to severely damage my enthusiasm for the game straight off. Sounds like the game is going to be drastically altered into a shape that will make me take the jump to KoW completely.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have to agree. Unless they come up with a background that's just as good (not "bubblehammer") then WHF is dead to me.

      Delete
    2. Good riddance. The Old World had terrible, nonsensical fluff (not Wrath of Kings bad, but still), and the rules had become unplayable. Plus, everyone was moving to steampunk/sci-fi anyway.

      Less players with your attitude will make the game successful.

      Delete
    3. Its the same back ground.... Unless i missed a page saying that warhammer lore was all a dream the back ground didnt go anywhere.

      This sounds more like typical human fear of change rather than what you actually claim

      Delete
    4. Piss of Doog, you have no idea what you're talking about.

      Also, +1 Christine, I've totally lost all enthusiasm for Fantasy. Selling off the Elves and devoting my hobby time to 40k.

      Delete
    5. *off

      Man, I wish there was an edit function for spelling pedants like myself.

      Delete
    6. I honestly agree with him. The game looks so blan and boring when I watch people play. And we have a lot of fantasy players here, who play more regularily than the 40k players. I just can't stand how slow it is. This new edition is a good thing.

      Delete
    7. I loved how movement actually mattered in WHFB, but hated the large unit requirements and "six" spells. The game was far more challenging than 40k, and required more thought. If it turns into 40k, then i'm out.

      Delete
    8. Thats hilarious, McDoogle - "Less players with your attitude will make the game successful"

      Considering I was one of the gamers that had been a fiercely loyal Warhammer Fantasy gamer for over 20 years, I don't see how your logic works here. I have year-on-year plowed money into my collection and whist other gamers have dropped off I stayed, because I loved the lore and setting. If anything, it was old-fags like me that kept Warhammer going for so long, if the sales were so bad as you keep suggesting.

      arbaal - "This sounds more like typical human fear of change rather than what you actually claim". Not really, if the rumor about Steampunk is true - I'm out. I hate steampunk as an aesthetic and the market is currently saturated with it. Its not a case of hating\fearing change - because its a potential move in a direction I already know I don't like.

      For the record - on the console RPG front, I've always been a Dragon Quest gamer and not an early 'steampunk' Final Fantasy one as well.

      Delete
    9. It was funnier the first time, Thomas! I thought it was like Beard of Odin! Or By Crom's Balls!

      Piss of Doog!

      Delete
    10. I love the old setting, but I'm more than willing to give something new a go, those old stories aren't going anywhere after all.

      Delete
    11. + 1 Christine, I've made the switch to KoW some time ago and haven't looked back since.

      Also, their is just no reasoning with ultra fanboys like McDoogle.
      Dweeps like him are just to full of themselves.

      Delete
    12. To be honest I'd just wait for the rules and the lore to come out and not pick up anything new till it does.

      Delete
    13. I liked the huge unit easy movement in fantasy. I like playing conscripts in 40k but moving them is a nightmare

      Delete
    14. They would have to re release the whole line to make it steam punk.... They already have the skaven as the steam punk flavor. ive never even heard that rumor besides people saying dwarves were going to be more steam punky (which was one guys discription and may just mean engineers use more gadgets)

      Delete
    15. not much a fan of steam punk myself but it has crept into fantasy over the last decade, dwarves, skaven, the empire, ogres and others have got some SP influence, if you have been involved in fantasy and haven't seen this then you must only play with and against those factions not having any elements of SP. not a fan of SP, but i am a fan of Dwarves. my 10k + of them are not being rebased nor am i ragequitting, they will sit gloriously in a cabinet and i will potentially buy into the new incarnation of them (if they appeal to me)

      Delete
    16. ive said this before, but getting rid of the areas of the warhammer setting they never used beyond stereotypes of real world places is nothing but good in my eyes. it always annoyed me for the setting to have places like Cathay, Nippon and Ind just because every setting needs an Eastern themed zone, and they always turn out to be tired clichés.

      Nippon is just the Japanese name for Japan, and all it had was feudal Japan with magic. So inventive!

      Delete
    17. I am on the edge of my seat for the new release. I have a significant Lizardmen army (no Steampunk) and want to get it back out of the cabinet. Endtimes sucked for us, and pissed most of us off. Hopefully we all get a game we can actually play.

      Still waiting...

      Lustria abandoning the planet?... C'est de la merde truc.

      Still waiting.

      Delete
    18. But then again, NONE of us really know what they are doing with the game, so I will shut up and just wait (and hope).

      Still waiting...

      Delete
  7. It may have been said before, but I think the round bases make sense for the skirmish rules where you won't be pushing around large blocks of models. My theory, anyway.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not really. Round bases really don't matter there either. If rumors are true, then one or two models closing in on one another for cc won't care about round or square bases. Having option of the traditional (blocks) style of play or the smaller skirmish style would require squares, at least for the unit formation blocks.

      I do not buy the round base rumor one bit.

      But then again, I play lizardmen, so you can tell how accurate my foresight is... lol

      Here's to troglodons and ripperdactyls (the two units that actually pushed me to buy the army and get into the game)

      Delete
  8. Replies
    1. Taking a gamble on losing us old-fags in the hopes of getting some fresh blood into the system, basically.

      Rather than balancing the ruleset to work on a smaller scale and keeping the game in fact, they seem to be adopting a "slash and burn" technique.

      Chips are now up in the air. We'll see how the fall - if the rumors are correct, then I'm out and if they're false, I'll have to wait and see. Round bases has definitely pushed up the odds of 'I'm out' being the outcome, though.

      Delete
    2. I see all the races still coming back I doubt GW will want to drop any product save for books, round bases seem to be more for the skirmish game mode then anything else though.

      Delete
    3. I'm very disheartened by these rumors as well. Perhaps the "thinking" (and I do use that term loosely) at GW is that the current player base for fantasy has everything they need to play already and so if the game continues as is, the profitability has a very low, stagnant ceiling. But if they blow things up, make it more similar to the 40k gamer, they can draw in new gamers who'll spend tons of money on a new game whereas losing the current players won't matter because they weren't buying stuff anyway (in GW's mind).

      And in a few years when the new crowd no longer cares about the game and sales decline again, GW will overhaul the game again back to something more like fantasy and draw all the old players back in.

      As a side note, for those that say the old world is stale and derivative, we get that some people prefer sci-fi to fantasy as a genre, but that does not mean that 40k is somehow this incredibly original story while fantasy is somehow a bland story devoid of purpose. We get it, some prefer 40k. But please respect that others prefer the fantasy setting. Knights, dragons, and epic quests of overmatched men besieged by monsters is timeless and immensely popular (LoTR, D&D, and GoT do/did pretty well commercially). So there is a place for it and a following even if it's not Paradise Lost in Space.

      Delete
    4. The only thing that made the WFB setting stale was the relative lack of new stuff and opportunities to play unorthodox factions imo.
      Warhammer Forge did plan on addressing that with the sadly canned mercenary supplement, which would have seen the release of Arabyan units and such as mercs much like an extension of the old regiments of renown.
      If they wanted to renovate Warhammer they should have just done a run of smaller scale ally/merc armies like they're doing in 40k now, if you ask me. Bring back Kislev, Araby, Estalia and Tilea, Cathay and those tiger beastmen from Ind, whatever, that would definitely excite me more than this turn of events.

      Delete
    5. @Baman
      I'd say bring them back only if they can do something new with them. Araby is just Arabia in the most boring stereotypy "magic fantasy Arabia" way possible, and Cathay was just an excuse to have the China-but-with-magic-and-dragons Zone that is required of all fantasy settings by law

      Delete
  9. *Facepalm* But why not just skirmish with square bases? Round bases add NOTHING to the game outside of trouble ranking bulky models up on square. And we've all learned to deal with that.
    One does not simply switch to round bases. Either frontage is gone, and a good portion of warhammer strategy with it; or 50% of games will become frontage debates.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Then use square? Why is everyone so ass hurt iver options

      Delete
    2. (As long as we do get a choice) Rules would change as well. For example: If my stormvermin chare a treeman on a round base, how do I know how many models are in base to base? A square and a circle can only make contact at a single point.
      I am VERY happy with the game as-is

      Delete
    3. Are you getting confused with skirmishing in the main game and a skirmish game? If you look at the old skirmish game rules there is no ranking so round bases work quite well here.

      If you want to look at the old rules get the Scribd app and read it from there. Same goes for looking at the generals companion, and other such books no longer in print which show how to link skirmish games with main games. Personally think this is the way the game is going to go again.

      Delete
    4. I think the round bases are to distance the game types from one another, and to coerce you to buy another kit for your fantasy army and dress them up like a kill team squad.

      Delete
    5. I can't imagine round bases would have much impact on facing really. Most likely, if both square formations and round skirmish units exist in both game modes, they will be treated as wholly different kinds of units, with the round based skirmish units likely being immune to flanking charges and such while the formations gets rank bonuses etc like normal.

      Delete
    6. why not mount them on a single movement tray like base and not worry about wound allocation via removal of models, kinda bit like some historical games do. but keep a tally of wounds and when the unit is "wiped out" you remove the "collective models on a singular base" this would get rid of both issues of round or square inherently have. just a thought and one that won't happen/come into fruition.

      Delete
    7. Dark Apostle - thats how Kings Of War does its damage allocation. You're effectively removing "leadership" until the until breaks and runs away. Works perfectly for quick and easy combat resolution.

      Delete
    8. Christine- might have to check it out. the models look pretty cool as well. if fantasy goes FUBAR then atleast there is an alternative.

      Delete
  10. My gut thought is that round bases will be just for the skirmish game. So you can collect small fantasy troups ( think mordenheim) then there will be the bigger games like we currently have that continue to have square bases. So potentially you'd end up collecting a skirmish army and a main army to play with.

    Either way I'm excited whatever happens.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Same thoughts here, I think they want to try and grab a few extra bucks off the Skirmish game like they had tried to do from kill team suggesting heavy customisation options mostly for aesthetic reasons though.

      Delete
    2. Same thoughts here, I think they want to try and grab a few extra bucks off the Skirmish game like they had tried to do from kill team suggesting heavy customisation options mostly for aesthetic reasons though.

      Delete
  11. Might it not actually be that the round bases are there for the casual collector? Round bases look way better on looks to a model. It's the same what is at warhammer world. Artist impression for display looks.

    (Although that skirmish vs battles game in round and squares does make sense to)

    ReplyDelete
  12. all models will be supplied round and square as standard. this is the new "standard" GW now have a mount them on round or square to either game with or to display. think 40k modeling and rules freedoms and disadvantages for gaining certain benefits but in a more modeling aspect, it will have rules for covering either round or square bases. either can be used in either game "mode".

    ReplyDelete
  13. Round bases in demon packs already make sense bc 40k. But what if the spotted round bases mean that skaven are coming to 40k? ;D

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. maybe thats what the warhammer rebrand means! no warhammer fantasy OR warhammer 40k anymore, just warhammer where you throw it all on the table and have warhammer fun warhammer

      Delete
  14. Problem: If round bases are for the skirmish style game and the skirmish style game is for a cheaper intro to the full game, and the full game is an extension of said skirmish game but uses square bases as par warhammer as we know it now, then would this not mean having to re base or re purchase your miniatures... in other words Buuullllllllshiiiiiiitttttttt.

    and on another note. It would be extremely easy to fake these photos (it is 1d4chan after all)
    I have bought and seen others buy orders from GW of exactly the same miniaturs in these photos over the last week and have not seen ANY round bases in the packs.
    We shall see what the future brings, but as far as I am concerned this is very dubious to say the least.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Skirmish games are only about 125pts to 250pts. So you are only looking at a few models to play a game.

      Delete
  15. oh gosh i get to put a rumour on the table, prepare your salt!

    i was at my local GW yesterday, and was talking with the manager about 9th. He has no idea whats happening either, but in June he's going up to head office for a promotional video, and is getting new models to paint up for a new introductory game table. He said they only do this for new editions, and the same thing happened for Dark Vengeance

    ReplyDelete
  16. Step 1: buy clampack

    Step 2: make small incision in packaging.

    Step 3: insert spare round base.

    Step 4: photograph packageing so as to conceal the incision.

    Step 5: upload pictures to Internet.

    Step 6: successful troll is successful!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Let's assume for a minute these rumours are correct (looking at the photos from Warhammer World would seem to indicate so)...

    This amuses me (in a slightly annoyed way) because I spent years getting my gaming group happy with my using square bases in 40K so I didn't have to fashion up some fancy movement trays to allow round bases in Fantasy (as I often use my Daemons cross-system)....seems now I should've gone the other way, lol

    ReplyDelete
  18. A formal skirmish / small battles system using round bases is pretty much the only thing that would re-invigorate my personal interest in the Warhammer world these days. I CBA buying/building/painting the hordes of mini's expected of Warhammer 8th edition. I also prefer the aesthetic of round bases (though they are obviously not practical to rank up without special slotted movement trays) - so I'm all for this.

    ReplyDelete