• The forum software have been upgraded to the latest version.

    If you notice anything that looks off, or does not work, please let us know.

    For more information, click here.

GW News: LAS VEGAS OPEN 2025

Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl said:
They are released once a year, but each season has 8 warbands released for it (2 in the core set and 6 others in separate packs) and the next season has never arrived until all the warband boxes for the current season has been released. The current season, Harrowdeep, has currently had only 4 warbands previewed, only 3 of which have been released (the Stormcast and Kruleboyz in the core set, the Ogre pirate warband and the previewed but hitherto unreleased Frankenstein undead warband).

If Harrowdeep is meant to continue the legacy of the previous seasons, there should be four other warband boxes in the pipeline which GW seem to have leapfrogged with their preview of the next season's starter set. Alternatively GW may well have reduced the number of warbands per season to 4, which would line up with this new preview, but would be a shame in my opinion because I like to see variety.
Click to expand...
And does each new core set essentially invalidate the one that came prior? Is it like a brand new edition with new core rules?
 
NIGHTBRINGER said:
And does each new core set essentially invalidate the one that came prior? Is it like a brand new edition with new core rules?
Click to expand...

I believe it plays the role of a new edition in that it replaces the previous one and changes the rules enough that you have to switch to the new set if you want to keep competing (which has always put me off playing Underworlds because I don’t want to have to buy a new Core set every year) but the changes in each new Core set are a tune-up of those that came in the set before it, rather than brand-new rules.

I imagine you could easily just buy one Core Set you like and stick with it like, for example, you and I stick with 8th Edition Fantasy and I stick with 6th Ed 40K, so long as you have friends that want to play the ruleset from that era, but there is always the concern that you’ll get left in the past as the competitive scene shifts to the rules from the next new Core set every year.
 
Lord Agragax of Lunaxoatl said:
I believe it plays the role of a new edition in that it replaces the previous one and changes the rules enough that you have to switch to the new set if you want to keep competing (which has always put me off playing Underworlds because I don’t want to have to buy a new Core set every year) but the changes in each new Core set are a tune-up of those that came in the set before it, rather than brand-new rules.

I imagine you could easily just buy one Core Set you like and stick with it like, for example, you and I stick with 8th Edition Fantasy and I stick with 6th Ed 40K, so long as you have friends that want to play the ruleset from that era, but there is always the concern that you’ll get left in the past as the competitive scene shifts to the rules from the next new Core set every year.
Click to expand...
That sounds terrible!!

Who wants to try to constantly keep up with such a frantic release schedule? I think it could be hard to find players for an older edition that was around for only a year. 8th WFB was a major release that stuck around for a good number of years and had many army books and models released. It had both the time and released material to build up a dedicated fan base. I just can't see that same thing playing out for an edition that is only released for a single year with a couple of warbands thrown into the mix.

Thanks for the info!
 
It doesn't necesarly invalidate, but it does expand to the point not having acces to the new core rules in some way means certain key-words and stuff don't make any sense. For example, casters were only introduced in edition 2. So unless you had the edition 2 core-rules any caster card was just kind of a mystery as to how it actually works.

NIGHTBRINGER said:
That sounds terrible!!
Click to expand...
Meh, I don't think you should compare it to a WFB edition. More like a major patch in a videogame.
Still pretty terrible, but it's manageable :p
 
NIGHTBRINGER said:
The difference being that a major patch for a video game is free.
Click to expand...
mwha, in between subscriptions, battlepasses & sunk-cost fallacy for skins and whatnot to hook people in, that may not be entirely true :p
 
NIGHTBRINGER said:
Depends on your gaming/spending habits I suppose, exceptions do exist. For the most part it remains true.
Click to expand...
Lemme rephrase it. As a general rule, videogames that use a similarly aggresive "at-least-once-a-year-the-game-significantly-changes" patch-cycle don't exactly have particularly great monetization. And sure, not everyone is affected by it in equal measure, especially if they focus on whales. But that doesn't exactly make the approach they use ethical.
 
Canas said:
As a general rule, videogames that use a similarly aggresive "at-least-once-a-year-the-game-significantly-changes" patch-cycle don't exactly have particularly great monetization.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. I'm talking about games like Horizon, God of War, Red Dead Redemption, Borderlands, Skyrim, Gears of War, Dark Souls, etc. These games get patched all the time to fix issues or to simply improve the gamer experience. They don't cost extra and are taken care of in the background. If someone is a casual gamer, they might not even know anything about it, it just happens and the game will perform better as a result. No extra effort is required on the part of the user and no additional cost is incurred.

If we're talking about those supposedly "free to play" games (often seen on the mobile platform), then I agree with you. I don't waste my time with those, so whenever I use the general term "video game" I'm talking more along the lines of legit triple A titles.
 
NIGHTBRINGER said:
If we're talking about those supposedly "free to play" games (often seen on the mobile platform), then I agree with you. I don't waste my time with those, so whenever I use the general term "video game" I'm talking more along the lines of legit triple A titles.
Click to expand...
There's plenty of triple A titles that use the same monetization schemes as mobile games use, just with an additional 60 (or well, 80 now I guess) cost upfront :p

As for the examples you gave, I think a big difference is also that the patches they get are primarely focused on fixes, not on big overhauls. You're not going to come back to Skyrim after 15 years to find a whole bunch of new skills or entire new storylines. Generally speaking as long as the updates are focused on bugfixing the monetization stays relativly fine. The moment it goes beyond that you get DLC if you're lucky, which is generally at least still vaguely fairly prized. Or you go into free-to-play model of selling skins and lootboxes (despite it not actually being free to play...)
 
Canas said:
You're not going to come back to Skyrim after 15 years to find a whole bunch of new skills or entire new storylines.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but that game is a million times bigger than Warhammer Underworlds will ever be. It is a complete and immersive experience, even without any DLC. Obviously you have to pay for a video game DLC (unless you wait a while and buy the GOTY edition). I never claimed that DLC was free, my original post was clearly in reference to patches being free...

NIGHTBRINGER said:
The difference being that a major patch for a video game is free.
Click to expand...
 
Back to Warhammer Underworlds, GW are now putting that new Nethermaze Core Set on pre-order on Saturday alongside that second warband for Harrowdeep (unless it's going to count as a Nethermaze warband, in which case Harrowdeep will have only introduced 3 warbands, whereas all previous editions have introduced 8). Such a strategy makes very little sense given Harrowdeep hasn't been out for less than a year, unless they're getting it out of the way early so they can get on with releasing the new edition of Horus Heresy.
 
From what I understand, production and shipping delays are still a big problem for some things. I imagine that is really contributing to GW's odd release schedules.
 
Last edited:
Just A Skink said:
From what I understand, production and shipping delays are still a big problem for some things. I imagine that is really contributing to GW's odd release schedules.
Click to expand...

This is a combination of ripples from the supply chain implosion after the initial rise of COVID-19 AND GW's rumored attempt to open a warehouse in the midwest that then got tanked due to said covid supply chain issues.
 
Lord-Marcus said:
This is a combination of ripples from the supply chain implosion after the initial rise of COVID-19 AND GW's rumored attempt to open a warehouse in the midwest that then got tanked due to said covid supply chain issues.
Click to expand...
Interesting. I didn't know about the midwest warehouse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top