Reply To: Changes coming to Warlord's support for exisiting games

[fightcitymayorParticipant 2104xp 2]

I see how Warlord would really like to expand their offerings without investing a ton of $$$ and time, but when things get unceremoniously chucked out the side door then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy of “This is obviously a stab at leveraging mechanics/models we already have in order to establish a beach-head into areas other companies do better than we do,” and people can smell that coming a mile away.

Bolt Action is fun, Bolt Action is popular, so let’s leverage the rules to do sci-fi Bolt Action (Antares) and fantasy Bolt Action (Erewhon) and post-apoc Bolt Action (Konflikt ’47)  Wait, these other lines aren’t selling well, we need to pare back our offerings!  But was anyone really asking for those also-ran efforts anyway?

Cruel Seas was leveraged into Black Seas (which was then licensed to Mantic for Armada), then into Victory At Sea.

The problem is when all of these universe spinoff games are rarely asked for (was anyone really craving a fantasy version of Bolt Action?) and then treated like redheaded step-children (is that a figure of speech in the UK?) making consumers think “Well, this doesn’t seem to be treated like a priority, so I guess I’ll skip it too.”