Reply To: If you were in charge of GW now

[poosh 4207xp 2]

The 9th Age isn’t a true successor to Warhammer Fantasy as it has retained and in fact seems to double down on aspects of Warhammer Fantasy that weren’t exactly the best. It’s very much for a particular sort of gamer rather than a mass wargamer.

And I don’t think we could ever make judgements about whether or not mass-wargames are the ultimate desire, or not, of gamers for the simple reason that mass wargaming is difficult to physically do: skirmishers are popular imo less because people prefer them and more because it’s simply easier to physically do i.e. people don’t want to lug £500 worth of models in 2 carry cases to the an isolated gaming hall. They’d rather carry ten models in their back back. This is why Kill Team and Shadespire Whatever are given significant attention.

GW imo could have had significant more success by not touching Age of Sigmar and retaining the Fantasy background  whilst retaining the simplified, streamlined “1 or 2 pages” ruleset which has been entirely the right thing to do (and is the reason 40K’s latest edition has been an amazing success).

GW wouldn’t licence Warhammer to another miniature company because they are engaged in Warhammer Legends and clearly think there is enough money out there for making made-to-order original warhammer models and investing time in “Age of Sigmaring” the original Fantasy armies albeit slowly. I doubt anyone * wants * the Age of Sigmar IP – but Original Warhammer fantasy is coveted.

Which is what they should have done from day 1 and not bothered with the Age of Sigmar, would have saved so much bad blood.

That being said, Age of Sigmar is a far more mainstream product which is far more in keeping with popular fantasy (world of warcraft etc) and customizable card games.