All times are UTC


It is currently Sat Nov 30, 2024 4:07 pm



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 49 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: WOTR Officially Dead to GW: We're on Our Own
PostPosted: Thu May 29, 2014 9:11 am 
Elven Warrior
Elven Warrior
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2012 11:35 am
Posts: 922
Location: London, UK
Images: 58
Mordhheim is a dead game. Necromunda is a dead game. Bloodbowl is a dead game. All have thriving fan driven communities.

The game is alive while people play it.

_________________
Available for Commissions!

Check out my blog: http://yggdrasilpainting.wix.com/yggdrasilpainting
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WOTR Officially Dead to GW: We're on Our Own
PostPosted: Thu May 29, 2014 9:20 am 
Craftsman
Craftsman
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:34 am
Posts: 265
Warlord wrote:
I don't have the rulebook in front of me, but I believe there is something in there that states one Epic Hero for every 1,000 points.

There is no limit on epic heroes. The limit you are thinking of is only 1 fortune/fate for up to 2000 points, and and additional one for every further 1000 points. Heroes only enhance formations and if you take a 150 point hero, that is effectively 6 companies of WoMT you aren't taking. And you have to weigh if any hero you take offsets that combat effectiveness. The only epics we 'control' is the number of Nazgul.

Warlord wrote:
Also I have a house rule, no shamans as this is a carrover from Warhammer Fantasy that has no place in Middle Earth IMHO.


I used to feel the same when shamans first came out for SBG. However Middle Earth is a magical place, even if not wizz-bang magical of High Fantasy settings. You don't need to house rule not to take them IMO, as they are overpriced for what they do. 100 points for 1 Might and 1 spell? In fact we have a house rule that armies *must* take at least one upgrade of each type available to them. As no one wanted to take banners or shaman/stormcallers etc as the points are usually better spent elsewhere.

Interestingly, despite the rulebook limit on Fortunes/Fates, we had to houserule people HAD to take one, as people in our group rarely did. They again are overpriced for such a minor buff. I don't know why the rulebook needed those limits, if i was facing someone with 5 fortunes in a 1500 point army, I would rub my hands together as he would have far fewer troops for me to face...

_________________
A second Edition for The War of the Ring:http://wessexcodex.wordpress.com

Taking the War in Middle earth to a new level!
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WOTR Officially Dead to GW: We're on Our Own
PostPosted: Fri Jun 13, 2014 3:00 pm 
Wayfarer
Wayfarer
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 7:14 am
Posts: 8
mertaal wrote:
The game is alive while people play it.


Right. It is a good game and it deserves to be played. And I will continue to play it!
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WOTR Officially Dead to GW: We're on Our Own
PostPosted: Mon Jun 16, 2014 10:09 am 
Wayfarer
Wayfarer
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 9:22 am
Posts: 22
Location: DURHAM ENGLAND
Images: 16
We use the Mantic, "Kings of War" rules, free to download,sensible Magic rules that don`t overpower the game, manageable massed units, very easy to learn rules great for younger members and as rank and file figures are still cheap to pick up on auction sites and car boot sales, then its still going to be possible to play and game battles from LOTR not WOTR,(we photographed each unit and turned them into reference cards and this speeded game play)as a long time LOTR gamer pre films i`ve never been impressed by GW rules but i do like the way the figures look like the film characters, so we should all keep promoting LOTR gaming and encouraging alternative Rules, Figures,Scales. just as an aside we have 5 members under the age of 18 none of which have read the books?

_________________
IF your invisible dont be surprised if people see right through you
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WOTR Officially Dead to GW: We're on Our Own
PostPosted: Wed Jun 18, 2014 8:32 pm 
Kinsman
Kinsman
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Apr 17, 2013 10:41 pm
Posts: 111
Hi Angmar of Old - what profiles do you use for the LOTR figures? I've been tempted for a long while to try out Kings of War, but with LOTR, and have looked in many a place for profiles, but am unsure of which would be best to use.
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WOTR Officially Dead to GW: We're on Our Own
PostPosted: Thu Jun 19, 2014 8:46 am 
Wayfarer
Wayfarer
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2014 7:14 am
Posts: 8
Does someone expect a sort of 2nd edition based on the "Battle of Five armies"? Not me - even if it would be awsome...
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WOTR Officially Dead to GW: We're on Our Own
PostPosted: Fri Jun 20, 2014 2:21 am 
Kinsman
Kinsman
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:50 am
Posts: 78
I can't see GW doing a second edition of WOTR for Battle of Five Armies. The models for The Hobbit are too expensive and packeged at ten per box. When WOTR came out infantry was packaged at 24 to a box and most gave you one company of archers, and two companies with hand weapons and shield. When the price increases kicked in, GW chose to repackage the infantry to 12 figure warband boxes and accompanying supplement books. Now with further price increases and 10 figure boxes, I predict there will be Battle of Five Armies scenarios for SBG in the new movie book with maybe 20 figures per side battle vignettes much like the ROTK movie book.

Sad.

I'll still use modified WOTR for a full BOFA scenario, and use many of the LOTR figures. I will buy mounted dwarves riding boars to add to my dwarf army if released.
:twisted:
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WOTR Officially Dead to GW: We're on Our Own
PostPosted: Thu Jun 26, 2014 4:25 pm 
Loremaster
Loremaster
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 1:11 am
Posts: 1091
Location: Massachusettes
Images: 3
GW should not attempt to tough WotR. If you look at my blog on the White Dwarf Articles, you can see that with War of the Ring for a whole year they had tons of articles and battle reports about that game, more than almost any release I have ever seen in any system. They put a ton of work and effort into making huge armies for showcases and battle reports. At that same time, forum post about that game were showing that it was not well received and that people could not keep up with it. generally people like the game, myself included, but it is really hard to find players at that level and to transport armies that large to game nights. It was just too hard to deal with, too epic.
And thus, immediately after, ALL support for Lord of the Rings went away, ALL prices went up across the board a few times... It was for sure the system that broke our Lord of the Rings SBG, and it is the reason still today that we see no support and high prices. So, in hind sight, I wish they had never made this game unless it was a pdf download for optional large games.

_________________
http://www.sithious.webs.com
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WOTR Officially Dead to GW: We're on Our Own
PostPosted: Thu Jun 26, 2014 11:07 pm 
Kinsman
Kinsman
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:50 am
Posts: 78
Too epic? What about Apocalypse for 40k? WOTR is essentially Apocalypse for LOTR SBG and no one is saying Apocalypse is too epic.

WOTR didn't put SBG in the state it's in, the price increases, finecast, and the decision to move to warbands as oppose to armies did. And two underwhelming Hobbit films didn't help.
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WOTR Officially Dead to GW: We're on Our Own
PostPosted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 1:32 am 
Elven Warrior
Elven Warrior
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 2:48 am
Posts: 586
Location: Kapiti, New Zealand
Sithious wrote:
GW should not attempt to tough WotR. If you look at my blog on the White Dwarf Articles, you can see that with War of the Ring for a whole year they had tons of articles and battle reports about that game, more than almost any release I have ever seen in any system. They put a ton of work and effort into making huge armies for showcases and battle reports. At that same time, forum post about that game were showing that it was not well received and that people could not keep up with it. generally people like the game, myself included, but it is really hard to find players at that level and to transport armies that large to game nights. It was just too hard to deal with, too epic.
And thus, immediately after, ALL support for Lord of the Rings went away, ALL prices went up across the board a few times... It was for sure the system that broke our Lord of the Rings SBG, and it is the reason still today that we see no support and high prices. So, in hind sight, I wish they had never made this game unless it was a pdf download for optional large games.


I must admit I like the idea and premise and scale of WOTR... in fact I still do. ... what put me off were daft rules, or inconsistencies in how armies or units worked...
If they used BOFA influence from forth coming movie to redo the rules, based more on Warmaster (as has become Warlord Games Black Powder/Hail Caesar) I would be sorely tempted... but I think the present cost of the figures has killed off any chance of anyone amassing sizable armies.
However I do agree, transporting such large armies to clubs, tournaments and games venues is very tricky, but I have nearly always just been a home or "garage-gamer"...
Such a shame WOTR was a stuff up - it could have been very good, an awesome spectacle on the table top... it would really have caught the feel of the Battle of the Pelennor!

_________________
www.scottswargaming.blogspot.com
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WOTR Officially Dead to GW: We're on Our Own
PostPosted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 1:59 am 
Elven Elder
Elven Elder
Offline

Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2012 12:18 pm
Posts: 2528
Location: Dallas, Texas
I agree with Sithious, the forced shift into WOTR killed the system as much as anything else.
Warlord you make the point of apocalypse games in 40k, it's not an accurate comparison. GW hasn't dropped 40k in exchange for apocalypse.
When WOTR came out I was initially willing to give it a go but I was disappointed by the imbalance that was immediately evident.

_________________
Commission Painting @FB http://www.facebook.com/squyrepainting
Commission Customers include:
GBHL Youtube Channel
MiniWargaming
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WOTR Officially Dead to GW: We're on Our Own
PostPosted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 2:52 am 
Loremaster
Loremaster
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Tue May 07, 2013 1:11 am
Posts: 1091
Location: Massachusettes
Images: 3
Warlord wrote:
Too epic? What about Apocalypse for 40k? WOTR is essentially Apocalypse for LOTR SBG and no one is saying Apocalypse is too epic.

WOTR didn't put SBG in the state it's in, the price increases, finecast, and the decision to move to warbands as oppose to armies did. And two underwhelming Hobbit films didn't help.


Yes. too Epic. :)
I have well over 5000 points of Mordor, well over, and when I first put WotR armies together I put almost all in and was still lacking in many area's that I felt needed more companies to be able to face off some of the legendary formations... I don't want to slap 6 companies down just to see how fast they get removed. But 8-10 companies can buffer those insane magic rounds, the shooting and then still those epic battles afterward. But look around, who has that many of one troop type? some of us yes, but on the same level as SBG, no way.
But that is really not the point I was trying to stress. The game was fun, but took huge armies to be that fun. And even at $25 a box back then, buying 4 boxes of one troop and painting it up when new SBG models were coming out still... or worse, buying companies of elites in blisters. It was not cheap. Because of that, GW did not sell as many sets as tHey thought the game as going to, and they put a lot of advertising in and time to trying to make people think in that scale... GW took a big Hit.
And thus my point, GW stopped, put on the brakes on releases, on support, on articles anywhere, everything came off the sight, and we were flat dropped to side kick status. That is why WotR doesn't sit well wit me. Not because it was not a fun game (I do agree some of the magic is crazy OP) But because of what it did to SBG, which I love and what it did in the long run to LOTR. The Price hikes that you mention are in retaliation, It was GW upset that we didn't buy in bulk for WotR and thus it is right there in the magazine. They stop publishing prices in the WD, stopped all support of LOTR and then raise prices and cut boxes in half soon after, then after the linger releases they had they didn't make ay more. So WotR is a clear and visible point where one could track the end of LOTR SBG as we know it.

Luckily LOTR limped on and I think the best thing they did after the fact was give us the rulebooks so we didn't have to use so many books to have the profiles. Also the last army building changes have been received well and still work in the Hobbit. The Hobbit line is pretty good even if it could use more releases and support. But SBG has limped on, and I would hate to see them attempt a WotR revival and blow it. If they want to drop the boxes down to $25 for 24 models though and call a truce, well I may be obliged to buy those 4 boxes now. 8)

_________________
http://www.sithious.webs.com
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WOTR Officially Dead to GW: We're on Our Own
PostPosted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 3:49 am 
Elven Warrior
Elven Warrior
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 2:48 am
Posts: 586
Location: Kapiti, New Zealand
Sithious wrote:
Warlord wrote:
Too epic? What about Apocalypse for 40k? WOTR is essentially Apocalypse for LOTR SBG and no one is saying Apocalypse is too epic.

WOTR didn't put SBG in the state it's in, the price increases, finecast, and the decision to move to warbands as oppose to armies did. And two underwhelming Hobbit films didn't help.


Yes. too Epic. :)
I have well over 5000 points of Mordor, well over, and when I first put WotR armies together I put almost all in and was still lacking in many area's that I felt needed more companies to be able to face off some of the legendary formations... I don't want to slap 6 companies down just to see how fast they get removed. But 8-10 companies can buffer those insane magic rounds, the shooting and then still those epic battles afterward. But look around, who has that many of one troop type? some of us yes, but on the same level as SBG, no way.
But that is really not the point I was trying to stress. The game was fun, but took huge armies to be that fun. And even at $25 a box back then, buying 4 boxes of one troop and painting it up when new SBG models were coming out still... or worse, buying companies of elites in blisters. It was not cheap. Because of that, GW did not sell as many sets as tHey thought the game as going to, and they put a lot of advertising in and time to trying to make people think in that scale... GW took a big Hit.
And thus my point, GW stopped, put on the brakes on releases, on support, on articles anywhere, everything came off the sight, and we were flat dropped to side kick status. That is why WotR doesn't sit well wit me. Not because it was not a fun game (I do agree some of the magic is crazy OP) But because of what it did to SBG, which I love and what it did in the long run to LOTR. The Price hikes that you mention are in retaliation, It was GW upset that we didn't buy in bulk for WotR and thus it is right there in the magazine. They stop publishing prices in the WD, stopped all support of LOTR and then raise prices and cut boxes in half soon after, then after the linger releases they had they didn't make ay more. So WotR is a clear and visible point where one could track the end of LOTR SBG as we know it.

Luckily LOTR limped on and I think the best thing they did after the fact was give us the rulebooks so we didn't have to use so many books to have the profiles. Also the last army building changes have been received well and still work in the Hobbit. The Hobbit line is pretty good even if it could use more releases and support. But SBG has limped on, and I would hate to see them attempt a WotR revival and blow it. If they want to drop the boxes down to $25 for 24 models though and call a truce, well I may be obliged to buy those 4 boxes now. 8)


I agree with what you say... The frightening bit would have been, how much I would have got suckered in, if the game had worked out, if I had tried to collect armies for everything in WOTR amounts... I'd probably have ended up broke anyway and still be trying to paint one army to completion!

One point I am curious about, at the time of the LOTR price hikes and reduced figures per box... what was happening at that time to WFB and 40K (I dont play either)? Did their pricing go up at the same time? Was it a general GW price hike or just aimed at LOTR?

_________________
www.scottswargaming.blogspot.com
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WOTR Officially Dead to GW: We're on Our Own
PostPosted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 10:57 am 
Craftsman
Craftsman
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:34 am
Posts: 265
There is nothing wrong with the basic system of WotR. It is fast and streamlined. More time is spent playing than measuring turn circles. and other clunky rules details.

I am comparing here WotR to some other mass battle systems. e.g. the Fantasy one also made by GW. It is rather futile to compare SBG and WotR directly, as though they share the same models and based on similar statlines the impact of the special rules make a completely different game. After all, one is a small scale skirmish game, the other indeed - mass battle.

Now there are issues with the system, primarily balance/costing ones. But remember WotR never went through multiple editions and improvements like all the other major Game rules by GW. I admit the army selection and points rules are in more than a few places out of sync or arbitrary, and feels like it wasn't fully tested. However the battle rules are slick and well implemented and do feel honed and well tested. it seems they liked testing the rules in massive scale battles recreating scenes from the War of the RIng.... and why not, that is the point of the system after all.

Indeed GW pushed WoTR hard for over a year to the detriment of SBG. Why? Money. After releasing almost everything conceivable from the films, most people were happy with their small forces, disinclined to expand much more. The rule system was langouring, needed a new injection, but having only limited access to the Tolkien IP, couldn't just invent or expand on the existing factions... so they scaled up.

WotR indeed was resisted, and even a little resented by SBG diehards, and as I pointed out above does indeed have some inherent points balance issues, which can impact one's enjoyment especially if abused by min-maxer types. But GW were able to take a different route to make money as the new Hobbit films came out of Development Hell and properly on the horizon, and promptly switched focus back to small scale SBG, and halved the box sizes.

But SBG has benefitted from WotR the new rules for heroic actions clearly have their roots in those from WotR, heroes have more choices and options and clearly now are more leaders than just souped-up killing machines.

I was a long term, if a little occasional due to lack of oppenents, SBG player. But I came back heavily into the hobby at about the time WotR was released and being pushed. I went into the GW store fully intending pad out my two SBG armies, and was introduced to the new WoTR system. The scale of the game swept me away. No more pushing individual models around, nudge here nudge there. No more resolving each individual fight. Instead large formations, a true army battling another, sweeping across the terrain, a charge resolved in a single roll of 30 or more dice all at the same time. This is what I always wanted from wargames... wars, battles, truly being able to recreate those massive battles from the films and not take 2 days to do it...

I already had 70 pikemen and 70 Uruk-hai (ok mostly just primed ;) ) via eBay. The core of a WotR was there, a few movement trays and my army of the White Hand was soon slaying formations of Horseboys in Sharkey's name! We love the system, we play regularly, we avoid most of the pitfalls and broken bits, and focus on what's important: having fun and battling (big scale) in Middle Earth.

_________________
A second Edition for The War of the Ring:http://wessexcodex.wordpress.com

Taking the War in Middle earth to a new level!
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WOTR Officially Dead to GW: We're on Our Own
PostPosted: Fri Jun 27, 2014 9:49 pm 
Kinsman
Kinsman
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:50 am
Posts: 78
WOTR was the course the game was going. At the time, we were begging for a mass battle system with the same 28mm figures. What we got was a fast play system that was designed to re-fight the great battles of middle earth. It was never designed for even points match tournament style play which is why it didn't sit well with GW players. Also the price increases made it too expensive to field the large formations needed to play the game as has been pointed out. When the game didn't sell the way they wanted, they repackaged for the SBG warband books, which are better for tournament play which GW gamers prefer.

SBG is going through a renaissance with The Hobbit films, which will fade when the films are done. There will not be a second go at WOTR or BOFA so if you want to fight actual battles in Middle Earth, we can either a) use a different rules system as some posters have suggested or b) take WOTR underground and make it work.

I plan on doing option b. I am ramping up for a map campaign of Isengard's invasion of Rohan. The amount of forces will be fixed and not based on points match, but on a set order of battle like many historical games are run. This way players can't play with points but rather strategy and maneuver.

GW isn't the end all for Middle Earth gaming, but they have the license for now. I remember playing Gary Gygax's Chainmail with the Heritage lead LOTR line from the Bakshi movie.

The war for middle earth will continue, no matter what GW does, as long as we are willing to continue it. Who knows, in ten years when GW files for bankruptcy, a better game will come along and we can start over again.
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WOTR Officially Dead to GW: We're on Our Own
PostPosted: Thu Jul 03, 2014 4:41 pm 
Craftsman
Craftsman
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 1:34 am
Posts: 265
Warlord wrote:
b) take WOTR underground and make it work.

I plan on doing option b. I am ramping up for a map campaign of Isengard's invasion of Rohan. The amount of forces will be fixed and not based on points match, but on a set order of battle like many historical games are run. This way players can't play with points but rather strategy and maneuver.

We are doing something similar.

Firstly we have been adjusting the points costs of the factions. Initially the Elves with a blanket 20% reduction on the company costs, as well as refactoring the price of upgrades for everyone (banners, musicians etc) and Fortunes and Fates. This has been done before on a couple of threads at The One Ring, but we are not just coming up with a new set of numbers, but basing it on over 300 games of WotR and then playtesting and going back and adjusting and rebalancing as necessary. The linky to this ongoing work is in my Sig.

Secondly we are making a map campaign based on the Fall of Arnor, and extensively a campaign based on the dying months of Arnor and the invasion by Angmar. I have been expanding Arnor into a full faction (based of course heavily on their fellow Dunedain, Gondor), and including hobbits in the faction (who not only lived in Arnor but canonically sent troops on more than one occasion to help defend the realm) and expanding Angmar, which always was rather lightweight as a faction in WotR.

But, we wont have set battles as such, but each force will have a fixed pool of troops at the start, and very limited reinforcements. For Arnor they need to marshal what little they have and try and survive until Gondor and the Elves come to their aid (which canonically they arrived 3 months too late!). So it is about manoeuvring on the regional scale, and like in real History the outcomes of individual battles dictating the course of the War. What purpose victory, if bought too dear?

_________________
A second Edition for The War of the Ring:http://wessexcodex.wordpress.com

Taking the War in Middle earth to a new level!
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WOTR Officially Dead to GW: We're on Our Own
PostPosted: Sun Jul 06, 2014 5:36 pm 
Kinsman
Kinsman
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 4:59 pm
Posts: 58
Sithious wrote:
And thus, immediately after, ALL support for Lord of the Rings went away, ALL prices went up across the board a few times... It was for sure the system that broke our Lord of the Rings SBG, and it is the reason still today that we see no support and high prices. So, in hind sight, I wish they had never made this game unless it was a pdf download for optional large games.


Quote:
But because of what it did to SBG, which I love and what it did in the long run to LOTR.


I disagree with your rose tinted assessment.

WotRs did not "break" the SBG - The *playerbase* of the latter was already in serious decline by 2007, despite the release of numerous army book supplements and related models.

The announcement of WotRs was generally greeted positively by the community as a whole as both a way to revive interest and support in the theme, as well as for a general desire for a mass combat system.

Thus it would be more accurate to say that it failed to "save" LotRs, being as you point out "too epic".

The same could be said about the current hobbit range - GW botched their chance to revive *long term* interest in the SBG, largely because of cost. Does that mean, with hindsight, that the SBG would be better off today had GW not made the hobbit products at all?


Quote:
And thus my point, GW stopped, put on the brakes on releases,


Yes, yes the brakes were put on new releases... >_>

1.1 Ent
1.2 Army of the Dead
1.3 Sons of Eorl
1.4 Halbarad
1.5 Citadel Guard
1.6 Grey Company
1.7 Isengard Uruk-Hai Commanders
1.8 Morannon Orc Commanders
1.9 Minas Tirith Commanders
1.10 Rohan Commanders
1.11 Elven Stormcaller
1.12 Dwarf Shieldbearer
1.13 Druzhag
1.14 Amdur
1.15 Haradrim Hasharin
1.16 Mordur Uruk-Hai
1.17 Army of the Dead Banner Bearer
1.18 Gandalf (Minas Tirith)
1.19 Witch King (Minas Tirith)
1.20 Theoden (Pelennor)

1.1 Galadhrim Knights
1.2 Galadhrim Warriors
1.3 Galadhrim Banner Bearer
1.4 Guard of the Galadhrim Court
1.5 Rumil
1.6 Haldir

2.1 Golden King of Harad
2.2 Abrakhan Guard
2.3 Harad Commanders
2.4 Easterling Commanders
2.5 Black Guard of Barad-dur Commanders
2.6 Black Guard of Barad-dur
2.7 The Knight of Umbar
2.8 The Betrayer
2.9 Kardush The Firecaller

3.1 Winged Nazgul
3.2 Eomer, Marshal of the Riddermark
3.3 Grimbold
3.4 Grimbold's Helmingas Command
3.5 Saruman (Orthanc)

1.1 Thrydan Wolfsbane
1.2 Knights of Dol Amroth
1.3 Morgul Knights
1.4 Mauhur
1.5 Mauhur's Marauders Command
1.6 Duinhir
1.7 Blackroot Vale Archers Command
1.8 Knights of Dol Amroth Command on foot
1.9 The Dwimmerlaik
1.10 Faramir, Captain of Ithilien

2.1 Cave Drake
2.2 Dwarf King’s Champion
2.3 Gundabad Blackshields
2.4 Floi Stonehand


Quote:
on support, on articles anywhere, everything came off the sight, and we were flat dropped to side kick status.


GW support as a whole has dropped considerably over the decade and a bit since the SBG first came out, across all systems. Bitz Service, White Dwarf quality, Hobby Centre staffing, online articles, FAQs, etc, etc. The decline predates WotRs thus attributing subsequent decline to WotRs specifically seems a bit baseless.


Quote:
The Price hikes that you mention are in retaliation, It was GW upset that we didn't buy in bulk for WotR


WotRs responsible for the price hikes??? ROFL.

This is GW we're talking about.

When the SBG was launched GW hiked their prices.
When the bubble grew GW hiked their prices.
When the player base was growing GW hiked their prices.
When the bubble burst... GW hiked their prices.
When the player base was dwindling GW hiked their prices.
When the models were new GW hiked their prices.
When the models were old GW hiked their prices.
When they made models that everyone wanted GW hiked their prices.
When they made models that no-one wanted GW hiked their prices.
When they made a push to regrow the hobby in 2012 GW hiked their prices.
When the hobbit was released GW hiked their prices.
When the Desolation of Smaug was released GW hiked their prices.
When the model was for LotRs GW hiked their prices.
When the model was for WHFB GW hiked their prices.
When the model was for 40k GW hiked their prices.
When the model was made from metal GW hiked their prices.
When the model was made from plastic GW hiked their prices.
When they shifted to finecrap GW hiked their prices.
When material costs went up GW hiked their prices.
When material costs went down GW hiked their prices.
When the economy was booming GW hiked their prices.
When the recession hit GW hiked their prices.

See a pattern? GW price hikes their prices because that is what GW does, not because of any direct cause and effect.

Prices rose frequently BEFORE WotR and continued to rise frequently AFTER.
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WOTR Officially Dead to GW: We're on Our Own
PostPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 11:53 am 
Kinsman
Kinsman
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Sun Feb 05, 2012 8:41 pm
Posts: 172
ANGMAR of old wrote:
We use the Mantic, "Kings of War" rules, free to download,sensible Magic rules that don`t overpower the game, manageable massed units, very easy to learn rules


And you forgot to mention the author - Alessio Cavatore, the father of SBG rules! :)

I am going to try Kings of War with Lotr figures this weekend - my Dwarfs vs. my friend's Mordor. The rules are excellent and I recommend them to everyone who would like to play an easy to learn yet very tactical gaming system for larger armies. I have already abandoned Warhammer Fantasy and switched to this system!

We are going to use the Dwarfs and Kingdoms of Men armylists, before I convert Mordor into something specific. There are some fan lists for Tolkien's universe on the Kings of War forum, but I plan to do some on my own: http://forum.manticblog.com/showthread.php?17-Compilation-of-KoW-Army-lists-and-rules

_________________
My This and That Again WIP blog: viewtopic.php?t=25598
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WOTR Officially Dead to GW: We're on Our Own
PostPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 12:33 pm 
Ringwraith
Ringwraith
User avatar
Offline

Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2012 1:50 pm
Posts: 1339
Michaelc wrote:
A whole ton of true stuff


Best first post ever :yay:

_________________
Finished 2nd in the 2014 GBHL. My Wife's so proud

Free SBG fanzine: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=29569
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: WOTR Officially Dead to GW: We're on Our Own
PostPosted: Wed Jul 16, 2014 11:35 pm 
Kinsman
Kinsman
Offline

Joined: Wed Jun 11, 2014 4:59 pm
Posts: 58
Dr Grant wrote:
Michaelc wrote:
A whole ton of true stuff


Best first post ever :yay:


Came out a bit harsher than intended - I really just wanted to point out that the evidence suggests that blaming WotRs for the ills of the SBG is about on par with WHFB/40k blaming LotRs in general for all the ills with their hobbies.
Top
  Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 49 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 73 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: