Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

What and how many Races are we gonna get in WH3?

124»

Comments

  • Seswatha#7633Seswatha#7633 Registered Users Posts: 4,844
    edited December 2020

    Surge_2 said:

    ArneSo said:

    Surge_2 said:

    ArneSo said:

    Ludbone said:

    As both Core Races and DLC's.

    This is just my personal opinion. . .


    VERY LIKELY to BASICALLY CONFIRMED (hints + many contents, sources and material)

    - Ogre Kingdoms
    - Chaos Dwarfs
    - Kislev
    - Slaanesh
    - Tzeentch
    - Khorne
    - Nurgle
    - Legion of Nagash

    POSSIBLE to LIKELY

    - Dogs of War
    - Southern Realms
    - Cathay

    UNLIKELY to BARELY POSSIBLE (extremely limited official contents to none)

    - Nippon
    - Khuresh/Serpent Naga
    - Kingdom of Ind
    - Albion
    - Amazons
    - Araby (CA already dropped a no-no due to terrorism issues)

    Amazons are POSSIBLE.

    DoW/Southern Realms are VERY LIKELY.

    Monogods are UNLIKELY.
    Monogods are infinitely more likely than Cathay, are you kidding here?
    CA said they won’t do monogods when they stated that WoC and DoC won’t be mixed. They never lost a negative word about Cathay. So Cathay is more likely than Monogods.
    Really??? There a quote on that? If they have directly said no to MonoGods that would be good to know.
    They said that Warriors of Chaos and Daemons of Chaos would be implemented as their army books depicted them. This is something most people infer to mean, taht monogods are unrealistic, since they would simply share too many units from those two factions.
    This is an often mis-quoted stated. They said WoC & DoC would be separate - however what does that mean?

    No one is suggesting WoC would disappear as a faction; nor that we can't have DoC undivided content. Only that we may have Mono-God factions separate to WoC. This does not prohibit the statement.

    WoC
    Khorne
    Nurgle
    Slaanesh
    Tzeentch

    As five races - these are separate from one another are they not? How else could you describe it?

    We have had far far too many hints (and even a leak) to suggest Mono-Gods are impossible based on the interpretation of a quote.
    Depends on what you mean by the 4 god races here. If they have both mortal and daemon units, no they are not separate. And I can't find the quote quickly but it was implied that daemons will be implemented as their 8th edition armybook. This does not exclude "mixed" subfactions coming as well or CA changing their mind later, but not doing undivided DoC would mean they're the only 8th edition codex that is not implemented and a big disappointment for everyone who wants them (believe me we exist).
    Norsca has already taken units from the WoC roster - Mammoths, Skin Wolves, Fimir, these are all WoC units. By that logic we already have a race that was not implemented as per it's 8th edition.

    I have also made this thread;

    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/278848/ca-blog-hints-warhammer-3/p1?new=1

    Feel free to point out any I have missed... but you have to admit apart from "Bear with us" everything is chaos related... and Bear with us could just indicate a Kislev pre-order (which I think is likely).
    Only Mammoth are taken from WoC Forgeworld. Skinwolves while chaos affiliated are Monstrous Arcanum and don't belong to any particular faction, same goes for Fimir. Also let's not pretend that taking a few obscure units from supplements to make another roster is the same as pulling apart the core armybook into 4 pieces to implement 4 homebrew races instead of an official one.

    Norsca existing didn't prevent WoC from existing and having their proper armybook roster (which is not finished atm but will be).

    The hints are obviously chaos related because chaos would be the main theme of wh3 but in no way it implies monos.

  • Wyvax#7456Wyvax#7456 Registered Users Posts: 6,608

    Surge_2 said:

    ArneSo said:

    Surge_2 said:

    ArneSo said:

    Ludbone said:

    As both Core Races and DLC's.

    This is just my personal opinion. . .


    VERY LIKELY to BASICALLY CONFIRMED (hints + many contents, sources and material)

    - Ogre Kingdoms
    - Chaos Dwarfs
    - Kislev
    - Slaanesh
    - Tzeentch
    - Khorne
    - Nurgle
    - Legion of Nagash

    POSSIBLE to LIKELY

    - Dogs of War
    - Southern Realms
    - Cathay

    UNLIKELY to BARELY POSSIBLE (extremely limited official contents to none)

    - Nippon
    - Khuresh/Serpent Naga
    - Kingdom of Ind
    - Albion
    - Amazons
    - Araby (CA already dropped a no-no due to terrorism issues)

    Amazons are POSSIBLE.

    DoW/Southern Realms are VERY LIKELY.

    Monogods are UNLIKELY.
    Monogods are infinitely more likely than Cathay, are you kidding here?
    CA said they won’t do monogods when they stated that WoC and DoC won’t be mixed. They never lost a negative word about Cathay. So Cathay is more likely than Monogods.
    Really??? There a quote on that? If they have directly said no to MonoGods that would be good to know.
    They said that Warriors of Chaos and Daemons of Chaos would be implemented as their army books depicted them. This is something most people infer to mean, taht monogods are unrealistic, since they would simply share too many units from those two factions.
    This is an often mis-quoted stated. They said WoC & DoC would be separate - however what does that mean?

    No one is suggesting WoC would disappear as a faction; nor that we can't have DoC undivided content. Only that we may have Mono-God factions separate to WoC. This does not prohibit the statement.

    WoC
    Khorne
    Nurgle
    Slaanesh
    Tzeentch

    As five races - these are separate from one another are they not? How else could you describe it?

    We have had far far too many hints (and even a leak) to suggest Mono-Gods are impossible based on the interpretation of a quote.
    Depends on what you mean by the 4 god races here. If they have both mortal and daemon units, no they are not separate. And I can't find the quote quickly but it was implied that daemons will be implemented as their 8th edition armybook. This does not exclude "mixed" subfactions coming as well or CA changing their mind later, but not doing undivided DoC would mean they're the only 8th edition codex that is not implemented and a big disappointment for everyone who wants them (believe me we exist).
    Norsca has already taken units from the WoC roster - Mammoths, Skin Wolves, Fimir, these are all WoC units. By that logic we already have a race that was not implemented as per it's 8th edition.

    I have also made this thread;

    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/278848/ca-blog-hints-warhammer-3/p1?new=1

    Feel free to point out any I have missed... but you have to admit apart from "Bear with us" everything is chaos related... and Bear with us could just indicate a Kislev pre-order (which I think is likely).
    Only Mammoth are taken from WoC Forgeworld. Skinwolves while chaos affiliated are Monstrous Arcanum and don't belong to any particular faction, same goes for Fimir. Also let's not pretend that taking a few obscure units from supplements to make another roster is the same as pulling apart the core armybook into 4 pieces to implement 4 homebrew races instead of an official one.

    Norsca existing didn't prevent WoC from existing and having their proper armybook roster (which is not finished atm but will be).

    The hints are obviously chaos related because chaos would be the main theme of wh3 but in no way it implies monos.
    What's really awesome about the creation of Norsca's roster is that it allowed the implementation of units that otherwise never would have had a chance to be represented in game. Mammoths, skin wolves, fimir etc. Not to mention Wulfrik and Throgg would be dead last in line for LL status for the Chaos Warriors. By creating Norsca as it's own thing, we get a new culture that's 100% loreful and all these TT units get to truly shine instead of being forgotten. Tearing apart a preestablished race to create four new copy cat ones is about as far as you can get from the creation process behind Norsca as one could possibly get.
  • AxiosXiphos#9040AxiosXiphos#9040 Registered Users Posts: 11,013
    edited December 2020
    Wyvax said:

    Surge_2 said:

    ArneSo said:

    Surge_2 said:

    ArneSo said:

    Ludbone said:

    As both Core Races and DLC's.

    This is just my personal opinion. . .


    VERY LIKELY to BASICALLY CONFIRMED (hints + many contents, sources and material)

    - Ogre Kingdoms
    - Chaos Dwarfs
    - Kislev
    - Slaanesh
    - Tzeentch
    - Khorne
    - Nurgle
    - Legion of Nagash

    POSSIBLE to LIKELY

    - Dogs of War
    - Southern Realms
    - Cathay

    UNLIKELY to BARELY POSSIBLE (extremely limited official contents to none)

    - Nippon
    - Khuresh/Serpent Naga
    - Kingdom of Ind
    - Albion
    - Amazons
    - Araby (CA already dropped a no-no due to terrorism issues)

    Amazons are POSSIBLE.

    DoW/Southern Realms are VERY LIKELY.

    Monogods are UNLIKELY.
    Monogods are infinitely more likely than Cathay, are you kidding here?
    CA said they won’t do monogods when they stated that WoC and DoC won’t be mixed. They never lost a negative word about Cathay. So Cathay is more likely than Monogods.
    Really??? There a quote on that? If they have directly said no to MonoGods that would be good to know.
    They said that Warriors of Chaos and Daemons of Chaos would be implemented as their army books depicted them. This is something most people infer to mean, taht monogods are unrealistic, since they would simply share too many units from those two factions.
    This is an often mis-quoted stated. They said WoC & DoC would be separate - however what does that mean?

    No one is suggesting WoC would disappear as a faction; nor that we can't have DoC undivided content. Only that we may have Mono-God factions separate to WoC. This does not prohibit the statement.

    WoC
    Khorne
    Nurgle
    Slaanesh
    Tzeentch

    As five races - these are separate from one another are they not? How else could you describe it?

    We have had far far too many hints (and even a leak) to suggest Mono-Gods are impossible based on the interpretation of a quote.
    Depends on what you mean by the 4 god races here. If they have both mortal and daemon units, no they are not separate. And I can't find the quote quickly but it was implied that daemons will be implemented as their 8th edition armybook. This does not exclude "mixed" subfactions coming as well or CA changing their mind later, but not doing undivided DoC would mean they're the only 8th edition codex that is not implemented and a big disappointment for everyone who wants them (believe me we exist).
    Norsca has already taken units from the WoC roster - Mammoths, Skin Wolves, Fimir, these are all WoC units. By that logic we already have a race that was not implemented as per it's 8th edition.

    I have also made this thread;

    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/278848/ca-blog-hints-warhammer-3/p1?new=1

    Feel free to point out any I have missed... but you have to admit apart from "Bear with us" everything is chaos related... and Bear with us could just indicate a Kislev pre-order (which I think is likely).
    Only Mammoth are taken from WoC Forgeworld. Skinwolves while chaos affiliated are Monstrous Arcanum and don't belong to any particular faction, same goes for Fimir. Also let's not pretend that taking a few obscure units from supplements to make another roster is the same as pulling apart the core armybook into 4 pieces to implement 4 homebrew races instead of an official one.

    Norsca existing didn't prevent WoC from existing and having their proper armybook roster (which is not finished atm but will be).

    The hints are obviously chaos related because chaos would be the main theme of wh3 but in no way it implies monos.
    What's really awesome about the creation of Norsca's roster is that it allowed the implementation of units that otherwise never would have had a chance to be represented in game. Mammoths, skin wolves, fimir etc. Not to mention Wulfrik and Throgg would be dead last in line for LL status for the Chaos Warriors. By creating Norsca as it's own thing, we get a new culture that's 100% loreful and all these TT units get to truly shine instead of being forgotten. Tearing apart a preestablished race to create four new copy cat ones is about as far as you can get from the creation process behind Norsca as one could possibly get.
    No.

    A WoC 8th edition army could take Chaos Mammoths. In Warhammer total war they cannot as they are in a different race. By your own logic this is 'tearing apart a preestablished race'. This directly ties to what I am suggesting. This is not a valid argument for your opinion.

    They have taken 1 race (WoC); and turned it into 2 by using up as much additional content as they can find.

    I am suggesting they take 1 race (DoC); and turn it into 4 by using up as much additional content as they can find.

    These things are the same.
  • CaesarSahlertzCaesarSahlertz Registered Users Posts: 7,073
    Wyvax said:

    Surge_2 said:

    ArneSo said:

    Surge_2 said:

    ArneSo said:

    Ludbone said:

    As both Core Races and DLC's.

    This is just my personal opinion. . .


    VERY LIKELY to BASICALLY CONFIRMED (hints + many contents, sources and material)

    - Ogre Kingdoms
    - Chaos Dwarfs
    - Kislev
    - Slaanesh
    - Tzeentch
    - Khorne
    - Nurgle
    - Legion of Nagash

    POSSIBLE to LIKELY

    - Dogs of War
    - Southern Realms
    - Cathay

    UNLIKELY to BARELY POSSIBLE (extremely limited official contents to none)

    - Nippon
    - Khuresh/Serpent Naga
    - Kingdom of Ind
    - Albion
    - Amazons
    - Araby (CA already dropped a no-no due to terrorism issues)

    Amazons are POSSIBLE.

    DoW/Southern Realms are VERY LIKELY.

    Monogods are UNLIKELY.
    Monogods are infinitely more likely than Cathay, are you kidding here?
    CA said they won’t do monogods when they stated that WoC and DoC won’t be mixed. They never lost a negative word about Cathay. So Cathay is more likely than Monogods.
    Really??? There a quote on that? If they have directly said no to MonoGods that would be good to know.
    They said that Warriors of Chaos and Daemons of Chaos would be implemented as their army books depicted them. This is something most people infer to mean, taht monogods are unrealistic, since they would simply share too many units from those two factions.
    This is an often mis-quoted stated. They said WoC & DoC would be separate - however what does that mean?

    No one is suggesting WoC would disappear as a faction; nor that we can't have DoC undivided content. Only that we may have Mono-God factions separate to WoC. This does not prohibit the statement.

    WoC
    Khorne
    Nurgle
    Slaanesh
    Tzeentch

    As five races - these are separate from one another are they not? How else could you describe it?

    We have had far far too many hints (and even a leak) to suggest Mono-Gods are impossible based on the interpretation of a quote.
    Depends on what you mean by the 4 god races here. If they have both mortal and daemon units, no they are not separate. And I can't find the quote quickly but it was implied that daemons will be implemented as their 8th edition armybook. This does not exclude "mixed" subfactions coming as well or CA changing their mind later, but not doing undivided DoC would mean they're the only 8th edition codex that is not implemented and a big disappointment for everyone who wants them (believe me we exist).
    Norsca has already taken units from the WoC roster - Mammoths, Skin Wolves, Fimir, these are all WoC units. By that logic we already have a race that was not implemented as per it's 8th edition.

    I have also made this thread;

    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/278848/ca-blog-hints-warhammer-3/p1?new=1

    Feel free to point out any I have missed... but you have to admit apart from "Bear with us" everything is chaos related... and Bear with us could just indicate a Kislev pre-order (which I think is likely).
    Only Mammoth are taken from WoC Forgeworld. Skinwolves while chaos affiliated are Monstrous Arcanum and don't belong to any particular faction, same goes for Fimir. Also let's not pretend that taking a few obscure units from supplements to make another roster is the same as pulling apart the core armybook into 4 pieces to implement 4 homebrew races instead of an official one.

    Norsca existing didn't prevent WoC from existing and having their proper armybook roster (which is not finished atm but will be).

    The hints are obviously chaos related because chaos would be the main theme of wh3 but in no way it implies monos.
    What's really awesome about the creation of Norsca's roster is that it allowed the implementation of units that otherwise never would have had a chance to be represented in game. Mammoths, skin wolves, fimir etc. Not to mention Wulfrik and Throgg would be dead last in line for LL status for the Chaos Warriors. By creating Norsca as it's own thing, we get a new culture that's 100% loreful and all these TT units get to truly shine instead of being forgotten. Tearing apart a preestablished race to create four new copy cat ones is about as far as you can get from the creation process behind Norsca as one could possibly get.
    Norsca also opens the possibility for the Kurgan and the Hung. While still greatly unrealistic (I honestly don't think there is much to give them), they along with the Hobgoblins could be the skirmish cavalry factions. But, all of these, including the Hobgoblins, can just as easily be implemented as NPC factions with limited rosters.
  • Wyvax#7456Wyvax#7456 Registered Users Posts: 6,608

    Wyvax said:

    Surge_2 said:

    ArneSo said:

    Surge_2 said:

    ArneSo said:

    Ludbone said:

    As both Core Races and DLC's.

    This is just my personal opinion. . .


    VERY LIKELY to BASICALLY CONFIRMED (hints + many contents, sources and material)

    - Ogre Kingdoms
    - Chaos Dwarfs
    - Kislev
    - Slaanesh
    - Tzeentch
    - Khorne
    - Nurgle
    - Legion of Nagash

    POSSIBLE to LIKELY

    - Dogs of War
    - Southern Realms
    - Cathay

    UNLIKELY to BARELY POSSIBLE (extremely limited official contents to none)

    - Nippon
    - Khuresh/Serpent Naga
    - Kingdom of Ind
    - Albion
    - Amazons
    - Araby (CA already dropped a no-no due to terrorism issues)

    Amazons are POSSIBLE.

    DoW/Southern Realms are VERY LIKELY.

    Monogods are UNLIKELY.
    Monogods are infinitely more likely than Cathay, are you kidding here?
    CA said they won’t do monogods when they stated that WoC and DoC won’t be mixed. They never lost a negative word about Cathay. So Cathay is more likely than Monogods.
    Really??? There a quote on that? If they have directly said no to MonoGods that would be good to know.
    They said that Warriors of Chaos and Daemons of Chaos would be implemented as their army books depicted them. This is something most people infer to mean, taht monogods are unrealistic, since they would simply share too many units from those two factions.
    This is an often mis-quoted stated. They said WoC & DoC would be separate - however what does that mean?

    No one is suggesting WoC would disappear as a faction; nor that we can't have DoC undivided content. Only that we may have Mono-God factions separate to WoC. This does not prohibit the statement.

    WoC
    Khorne
    Nurgle
    Slaanesh
    Tzeentch

    As five races - these are separate from one another are they not? How else could you describe it?

    We have had far far too many hints (and even a leak) to suggest Mono-Gods are impossible based on the interpretation of a quote.
    Depends on what you mean by the 4 god races here. If they have both mortal and daemon units, no they are not separate. And I can't find the quote quickly but it was implied that daemons will be implemented as their 8th edition armybook. This does not exclude "mixed" subfactions coming as well or CA changing their mind later, but not doing undivided DoC would mean they're the only 8th edition codex that is not implemented and a big disappointment for everyone who wants them (believe me we exist).
    Norsca has already taken units from the WoC roster - Mammoths, Skin Wolves, Fimir, these are all WoC units. By that logic we already have a race that was not implemented as per it's 8th edition.

    I have also made this thread;

    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/278848/ca-blog-hints-warhammer-3/p1?new=1

    Feel free to point out any I have missed... but you have to admit apart from "Bear with us" everything is chaos related... and Bear with us could just indicate a Kislev pre-order (which I think is likely).
    Only Mammoth are taken from WoC Forgeworld. Skinwolves while chaos affiliated are Monstrous Arcanum and don't belong to any particular faction, same goes for Fimir. Also let's not pretend that taking a few obscure units from supplements to make another roster is the same as pulling apart the core armybook into 4 pieces to implement 4 homebrew races instead of an official one.

    Norsca existing didn't prevent WoC from existing and having their proper armybook roster (which is not finished atm but will be).

    The hints are obviously chaos related because chaos would be the main theme of wh3 but in no way it implies monos.
    What's really awesome about the creation of Norsca's roster is that it allowed the implementation of units that otherwise never would have had a chance to be represented in game. Mammoths, skin wolves, fimir etc. Not to mention Wulfrik and Throgg would be dead last in line for LL status for the Chaos Warriors. By creating Norsca as it's own thing, we get a new culture that's 100% loreful and all these TT units get to truly shine instead of being forgotten. Tearing apart a preestablished race to create four new copy cat ones is about as far as you can get from the creation process behind Norsca as one could possibly get.
    No.

    A WoC 8th edition army could take Chaos Mammoths. In Warhammer total war they cannot as they are in a different race. By your own logic this is 'tearing apart a preestablished race'. This directly ties to what I am suggesting. This is not a valid argument for your opinion.
    Taking a couple of obscure FW units available for the WoC and two extremely unlikely characters and using them for the centerpiece of an entirely new culture that was missing from a huge chunk of the map, is not the same as putting three different 8th edition rosters into a blender, mixing them and dividing them into four servings. If Norsca had been created by taking Chaos Chosen, Spawn, Dragon Ogres and Hellcannons, slapping on an icy coat of paint and trying to sell it as a brand new roster, that would have been like the monogod roster speculation.
  • Seswatha#7633Seswatha#7633 Registered Users Posts: 4,844
    edited December 2020

    Wyvax said:

    Surge_2 said:

    ArneSo said:

    Surge_2 said:

    ArneSo said:

    Ludbone said:

    As both Core Races and DLC's.

    This is just my personal opinion. . .


    VERY LIKELY to BASICALLY CONFIRMED (hints + many contents, sources and material)

    - Ogre Kingdoms
    - Chaos Dwarfs
    - Kislev
    - Slaanesh
    - Tzeentch
    - Khorne
    - Nurgle
    - Legion of Nagash

    POSSIBLE to LIKELY

    - Dogs of War
    - Southern Realms
    - Cathay

    UNLIKELY to BARELY POSSIBLE (extremely limited official contents to none)

    - Nippon
    - Khuresh/Serpent Naga
    - Kingdom of Ind
    - Albion
    - Amazons
    - Araby (CA already dropped a no-no due to terrorism issues)

    Amazons are POSSIBLE.

    DoW/Southern Realms are VERY LIKELY.

    Monogods are UNLIKELY.
    Monogods are infinitely more likely than Cathay, are you kidding here?
    CA said they won’t do monogods when they stated that WoC and DoC won’t be mixed. They never lost a negative word about Cathay. So Cathay is more likely than Monogods.
    Really??? There a quote on that? If they have directly said no to MonoGods that would be good to know.
    They said that Warriors of Chaos and Daemons of Chaos would be implemented as their army books depicted them. This is something most people infer to mean, taht monogods are unrealistic, since they would simply share too many units from those two factions.
    This is an often mis-quoted stated. They said WoC & DoC would be separate - however what does that mean?

    No one is suggesting WoC would disappear as a faction; nor that we can't have DoC undivided content. Only that we may have Mono-God factions separate to WoC. This does not prohibit the statement.

    WoC
    Khorne
    Nurgle
    Slaanesh
    Tzeentch

    As five races - these are separate from one another are they not? How else could you describe it?

    We have had far far too many hints (and even a leak) to suggest Mono-Gods are impossible based on the interpretation of a quote.
    Depends on what you mean by the 4 god races here. If they have both mortal and daemon units, no they are not separate. And I can't find the quote quickly but it was implied that daemons will be implemented as their 8th edition armybook. This does not exclude "mixed" subfactions coming as well or CA changing their mind later, but not doing undivided DoC would mean they're the only 8th edition codex that is not implemented and a big disappointment for everyone who wants them (believe me we exist).
    Norsca has already taken units from the WoC roster - Mammoths, Skin Wolves, Fimir, these are all WoC units. By that logic we already have a race that was not implemented as per it's 8th edition.

    I have also made this thread;

    https://forums.totalwar.com/discussion/278848/ca-blog-hints-warhammer-3/p1?new=1

    Feel free to point out any I have missed... but you have to admit apart from "Bear with us" everything is chaos related... and Bear with us could just indicate a Kislev pre-order (which I think is likely).
    Only Mammoth are taken from WoC Forgeworld. Skinwolves while chaos affiliated are Monstrous Arcanum and don't belong to any particular faction, same goes for Fimir. Also let's not pretend that taking a few obscure units from supplements to make another roster is the same as pulling apart the core armybook into 4 pieces to implement 4 homebrew races instead of an official one.

    Norsca existing didn't prevent WoC from existing and having their proper armybook roster (which is not finished atm but will be).

    The hints are obviously chaos related because chaos would be the main theme of wh3 but in no way it implies monos.
    What's really awesome about the creation of Norsca's roster is that it allowed the implementation of units that otherwise never would have had a chance to be represented in game. Mammoths, skin wolves, fimir etc. Not to mention Wulfrik and Throgg would be dead last in line for LL status for the Chaos Warriors. By creating Norsca as it's own thing, we get a new culture that's 100% loreful and all these TT units get to truly shine instead of being forgotten. Tearing apart a preestablished race to create four new copy cat ones is about as far as you can get from the creation process behind Norsca as one could possibly get.
    No.

    A WoC 8th edition army could take Chaos Mammoths. In Warhammer total war they cannot as they are in a different race. By your own logic this is 'tearing apart a preestablished race'. This directly ties to what I am suggesting. This is not a valid argument for your opinion.

    They have taken 1 race (WoC); and turned it into 2 by using up as much additional content as they can find.

    I am suggesting they take 1 race (DoC); and turn it into 4 by using up as much additional content as they can find.

    This things are the same.
    Not being to take 1 FW unit that might or might not have been implemented at all is the same as breaking a roster into tiny pieces and mixing it with an entirely different armybook? Right... I don't see how this can be argued in a good conscience tbh. If we go by definition "implemented by 8th edition armybook" WoC never even had Mammoth cause they're not in the armybook.

    WoC still have all their main units and lords and can be played like WoC. You can take some daemon units and add them to another faction for all I care, but DoC should have their undivided armybook roster as well as all the "important" lords like Skarbrand, Kairos etc as part of DoC.

  • Seswatha#7633Seswatha#7633 Registered Users Posts: 4,844
    edited December 2020
    Should also be noted that "monos" are actually not a common thing in fantasy lore (unlike AoS).

    While chaos daemons do fight each other on alignment basis in the realm of chaos, when they invade the mortal world they usually do so in mixed armies. And there are no mortals in the realm of chaos.

    And WoC rarely work together with DoC as a single force before ET, it's usually one or the other.

  • CaesarSahlertzCaesarSahlertz Registered Users Posts: 7,073
    It is also important to note, that ALL Forge World units were always secondary in nature. An opponent was always allwoed to simply deny the inclusion of Forge World units, unless it was agreed upon beforehand that Forge World units could be fielded. This means that an argument can be made, that it is only the Army List units that have to be considered "official" (for lack of a better word), and Forge World units are simply icing on the cake.
  • Beast_of_Guanyin#8747Beast_of_Guanyin#8747 Registered Users Posts: 44,792

    Should also be noted that "monos" are actually not a common thing in fantasy lore (unlike AoS).

    While chaos daemons do fight each other on alignment basis in the realm of chaos, when they invade the mortal world they usually do so in mixed armies. And there are no mortals in the realm of chaos.

    And WoC rarely work together with DoC as a single force before ET, it's usually one or the other.

    Don't get me wrong, the AoS stuff is cool. I'm going to get some Chaos AoS units myself for conversion purposes in my own army. It's just not particularly relevant to WHFB.

    You are completely right here.
    I am The Beast of Guanyin, The one who beasts 25 hours a day, 8 days a week, Vanilla Gorilla, The great bright delight, Conqueror of Mountains, Purveyor of wisdom, Official forum historian, Master Tamer of energy, the one they fear to name, Beastradamus, The Teacher, Master Unbiased Pollster, The Avatar of Tuesday, Chief hype Train Conductor, Uwu Usurper, Pog Wog Warrior, Poggers Patroller, Alpha of the species, Apex protector, Praetor of Positivity, Drybrush Disciple, Sophisticated Savage.
  • Surge_2#1464Surge_2#1464 Registered Users Posts: 13,935

    It is also important to note, that ALL Forge World units were always secondary in nature. An opponent was always allwoed to simply deny the inclusion of Forge World units, unless it was agreed upon beforehand that Forge World units could be fielded. This means that an argument can be made, that it is only the Army List units that have to be considered "official" (for lack of a better word), and Forge World units are simply icing on the cake.

    Should be noted in my decades in the TT not a single person was so inept as to decline FW units in a pickup game I participated in, or observed.
    Kneel

  • Seswatha#7633Seswatha#7633 Registered Users Posts: 4,844

    Should also be noted that "monos" are actually not a common thing in fantasy lore (unlike AoS).

    While chaos daemons do fight each other on alignment basis in the realm of chaos, when they invade the mortal world they usually do so in mixed armies. And there are no mortals in the realm of chaos.

    And WoC rarely work together with DoC as a single force before ET, it's usually one or the other.

    Don't get me wrong, the AoS stuff is cool. I'm going to get some Chaos AoS units myself for conversion purposes in my own army. It's just not particularly relevant to WHFB.

    You are completely right here.
    Yep, and the way AoS is set up you can mix allied lists anyway so mixed armies still possible. I do hope GW allows them to steal Tzaangor model from AoS though.

  • Surge_2#1464Surge_2#1464 Registered Users Posts: 13,935
    Oh and Chaos used to allow mixing Mortals, Daemons, and Beasts.

    This wasn't only an End Times or AoS thing. 6th, or earlier.
    Kneel

  • Seswatha#7633Seswatha#7633 Registered Users Posts: 4,844
    edited December 2020
    Surge_2 said:

    Oh and Chaos used to allow mixing Mortals, Daemons, and Beasts.

    This wasn't only an End Times or AoS thing. 6th, or earlier.

    Yep, but not on a per god basis, it was literally one huge faction with everything. And it's an old edition that has been since retconned in many ways in terms of lore.

  • CaesarSahlertzCaesarSahlertz Registered Users Posts: 7,073
    Surge_2 said:

    It is also important to note, that ALL Forge World units were always secondary in nature. An opponent was always allwoed to simply deny the inclusion of Forge World units, unless it was agreed upon beforehand that Forge World units could be fielded. This means that an argument can be made, that it is only the Army List units that have to be considered "official" (for lack of a better word), and Forge World units are simply icing on the cake.

    Should be noted in my decades in the TT not a single person was so inept as to decline FW units in a pickup game I participated in, or observed.
    Generally speaking I have declined it, on the grounds that if I weren't informed of the possibility to include FW before the match, then my opponent would have an unfair tactical advantage. Personally I usually brought two army lists around with me, one where I fielded FW units and one without.

    Obviously there are also the tournaments, which often directly stated that only Army Book units were to be fielded.
  • Wyvax#7456Wyvax#7456 Registered Users Posts: 6,608

    Should also be noted that "monos" are actually not a common thing in fantasy lore (unlike AoS).

    While chaos daemons do fight each other on alignment basis in the realm of chaos, when they invade the mortal world they usually do so in mixed armies. And there are no mortals in the realm of chaos.

    And WoC rarely work together with DoC as a single force before ET, it's usually one or the other.

    Don't get me wrong, the AoS stuff is cool. I'm going to get some Chaos AoS units myself for conversion purposes in my own army. It's just not particularly relevant to WHFB.

    You are completely right here.
    Yep, and the way AoS is set up you can mix allied lists anyway so mixed armies still possible. I do hope GW allows them to steal Tzaangor model from AoS though.
    I wouldn't be to worried about that. In the case where a unit existed in fantasy but never got an actual model until AoS, such as Tzaangors, the logical take is that their appearance 'in the world that was' wasn't any different from their appearance in AoS. I'm not a betting man, but I'd wager that Tzaangors and Slaangors as they appear in AoS have a pretty good shot of making their way into the Beastmen roster for TW:W eventually. They're some of the flashiest infantry units I've ever seen, they'd sell DLCs like hotcakes.
  • Qwerty55Qwerty55 Registered Users Posts: 728

    Should also be noted that "monos" are actually not a common thing in fantasy lore (unlike AoS).

    While chaos daemons do fight each other on alignment basis in the realm of chaos, when they invade the mortal world they usually do so in mixed armies. And there are no mortals in the realm of chaos.

    And WoC rarely work together with DoC as a single force before ET, it's usually one or the other.

    Don't get me wrong, the AoS stuff is cool. I'm going to get some Chaos AoS units myself for conversion purposes in my own army. It's just not particularly relevant to WHFB.

    You are completely right here.
    Yep, and the way AoS is set up you can mix allied lists anyway so mixed armies still possible. I do hope GW allows them to steal Tzaangor model from AoS though.
    Why shouldn't they be allowed? Tzaangors existed in Fantasy but never got a model, the AOS tzaangor is pretty much a Fantasy creation that happened to be made after the setting got removed.
  • FonRestorff#9571FonRestorff#9571 Registered Users Posts: 557
    Abmong said:

    I can't help but feel all this hype over Cathay will only go the way of Araby...

    One would expose the staff to serious danger, the other comes with a boatload of money.

    I very much doubt violent confusionists would show up with long knives at CA's door if they made Kathay...
  • LordSolarMach#5538LordSolarMach#5538 Registered Users Posts: 2,864

    Yep, but not on a per god basis, it was literally one huge faction with everything. And it's an old edition that has been since retconned in many ways in terms of lore.

    In 6th edition, if your General was marked anything but Undivided you could only take Heroes and Units with the same mark (second red outline):




    //
    ArneSo said:




    @ArneSo do we know what question this was an answer to? Or the broader context in general?
  • Ferestor#5771Ferestor#5771 Registered Users Posts: 1,313
    Most likely as core:
    Kislev
    Ogre
    Chaos Dawi
    DoC

    DLC:
    DoW or Southern Realms
    LP with Monogods theme

    Maybe Cathay

    All other races are unlikely.

    PS: The army books listed above are fanmade.
    The Ind-Book has literally the art from Age of Empires 3 Eastern Empire expansion.
  • Seswatha#7633Seswatha#7633 Registered Users Posts: 4,844
    Qwerty55 said:

    Should also be noted that "monos" are actually not a common thing in fantasy lore (unlike AoS).

    While chaos daemons do fight each other on alignment basis in the realm of chaos, when they invade the mortal world they usually do so in mixed armies. And there are no mortals in the realm of chaos.

    And WoC rarely work together with DoC as a single force before ET, it's usually one or the other.

    Don't get me wrong, the AoS stuff is cool. I'm going to get some Chaos AoS units myself for conversion purposes in my own army. It's just not particularly relevant to WHFB.

    You are completely right here.
    Yep, and the way AoS is set up you can mix allied lists anyway so mixed armies still possible. I do hope GW allows them to steal Tzaangor model from AoS though.
    Why shouldn't they be allowed? Tzaangors existed in Fantasy but never got a model, the AOS tzaangor is pretty much a Fantasy creation that happened to be made after the setting got removed.
    Copyright. CA has license for WHFB but not AoS and not sure how this is gonna work. But GW is updating WHFB anyway so hopefully not a problem.

    Yep, but not on a per god basis, it was literally one huge faction with everything. And it's an old edition that has been since retconned in many ways in terms of lore.

    In 6th edition, if your General was marked anything but Undivided you could only take Heroes and Units with the same mark (second red outline):




    //
    ArneSo said:




    @ArneSo do we know what question this was an answer to? Or the broader context in general?
    It's a mechanic to theme your list around a certain mark but it's still one armybook with the same roster for every god themed list. And outdated as well.

    Truth is, monos are not a lore accurate way to represent chaos per 8th ed WHFB lore. Especially if it's the main representation of Chaos in the game, then it's just plain not lore friendly.

  • MrDragon#2461MrDragon#2461 Registered Users Posts: 3,545
    edited December 2020

    Qwerty55 said:

    Should also be noted that "monos" are actually not a common thing in fantasy lore (unlike AoS).

    While chaos daemons do fight each other on alignment basis in the realm of chaos, when they invade the mortal world they usually do so in mixed armies. And there are no mortals in the realm of chaos.

    And WoC rarely work together with DoC as a single force before ET, it's usually one or the other.

    Don't get me wrong, the AoS stuff is cool. I'm going to get some Chaos AoS units myself for conversion purposes in my own army. It's just not particularly relevant to WHFB.

    You are completely right here.
    Yep, and the way AoS is set up you can mix allied lists anyway so mixed armies still possible. I do hope GW allows them to steal Tzaangor model from AoS though.
    Why shouldn't they be allowed? Tzaangors existed in Fantasy but never got a model, the AOS tzaangor is pretty much a Fantasy creation that happened to be made after the setting got removed.
    Copyright. CA has license for WHFB but not AoS and not sure how this is gonna work. But GW is updating WHFB anyway so hopefully not a problem.

    Yep, but not on a per god basis, it was literally one huge faction with everything. And it's an old edition that has been since retconned in many ways in terms of lore.

    In 6th edition, if your General was marked anything but Undivided you could only take Heroes and Units with the same mark (second red outline):




    //
    ArneSo said:




    @ArneSo do we know what question this was an answer to? Or the broader context in general?
    It's a mechanic to theme your list around a certain mark but it's still one armybook with the same roster for every god themed list. And outdated as well.

    Truth is, monos are not a lore accurate way to represent chaos per 8th ed WHFB lore. Especially if it's the main representation of Chaos in the game, then it's just plain not lore friendly.
    Try building an army with under 200 euros worth of minies that includes any named god-aligned character and then tell me again with a straight face it's just a "theme mechanic".

    Besides GW has gone out of it's way the last 8 years to split the gods up more and more to make mono-god armies a thing in all their franchises.

    What specifically mattered in 8th edition is a relevant argument but considering how much CA has already broken with 8th edition and GW's design philosophy for AoS and 40K has developed since then... plus the historical precedent, the "8th edition" argument is not a deathknell.

    That said I'm against Monogods on launch, Gimme a mono-god hybrid faction lord per lord pack for 4 of the relatively early lord packs for game 3 and that would probably be dope.
    I think the idea of Monogods on launch is extremely unlikely and not very desirable.
  • Seswatha#7633Seswatha#7633 Registered Users Posts: 4,844
    edited December 2020
    MrDragon said:

    Qwerty55 said:

    Should also be noted that "monos" are actually not a common thing in fantasy lore (unlike AoS).

    While chaos daemons do fight each other on alignment basis in the realm of chaos, when they invade the mortal world they usually do so in mixed armies. And there are no mortals in the realm of chaos.

    And WoC rarely work together with DoC as a single force before ET, it's usually one or the other.

    Don't get me wrong, the AoS stuff is cool. I'm going to get some Chaos AoS units myself for conversion purposes in my own army. It's just not particularly relevant to WHFB.

    You are completely right here.
    Yep, and the way AoS is set up you can mix allied lists anyway so mixed armies still possible. I do hope GW allows them to steal Tzaangor model from AoS though.
    Why shouldn't they be allowed? Tzaangors existed in Fantasy but never got a model, the AOS tzaangor is pretty much a Fantasy creation that happened to be made after the setting got removed.
    Copyright. CA has license for WHFB but not AoS and not sure how this is gonna work. But GW is updating WHFB anyway so hopefully not a problem.

    Yep, but not on a per god basis, it was literally one huge faction with everything. And it's an old edition that has been since retconned in many ways in terms of lore.

    In 6th edition, if your General was marked anything but Undivided you could only take Heroes and Units with the same mark (second red outline):




    //
    ArneSo said:




    @ArneSo do we know what question this was an answer to? Or the broader context in general?
    It's a mechanic to theme your list around a certain mark but it's still one armybook with the same roster for every god themed list. And outdated as well.

    Truth is, monos are not a lore accurate way to represent chaos per 8th ed WHFB lore. Especially if it's the main representation of Chaos in the game, then it's just plain not lore friendly.
    Try building an army with under 200 euros worth of minies that includes any named god-aligned character and then tell me again with a straight face it's just a "theme mechanic".

    Besides GW has gone out of it's way the last 8 years to split the gods up more and more to make mono-god armies a thing in all their franchises.

    What specifically mattered in 8th edition is a relevant argument but considering how much CA has already broken with 8th edition and GW's design philosophy for AoS and 40K has developed since then... plus the historical precedent, the "8th edition" argument is not a deathknell.

    That said I'm against Monogods on launch, Gimme a mono-god hybrid faction lord per lord pack for 4 of the relatively early lord packs for game 3 and that would probably be dope.
    I think the idea of Monogods on launch is extremely unlikely and not very desirable.
    I'm also not against monogods as DLC subfactions, but I think monos as 4 launch races is unlikely. And the game does try to follow 8th edition where possible, but expand beyond it in areas where it's not enough.

  • General_Hijalti#1213General_Hijalti#1213 Registered Users Posts: 6,119
    Ingr8 said:

    Core:

    • Ogres
    • Runts with hats
    • Daemon things (1 race although there could be subfactions in the same way as the Skaven clans)
    • Lumbria
    • Cathay
    Unlikely:
    • Kislev - they have already done the Kislev map in game 1. To backtrack and include game 1 factions in game 3 would be really rubbish.
    • DoW - they are now a subfaction of the Vampire Coast. They could expand the Coast roster but I think it is unlikely to be significant.
    Kislev is very likely with CA hinting at it, and GW bringing them back.

    DoW is not a subfaction of VC stop trolling.

    Lumbria is a joke.
    Cathay won't be core.
  • ScionOfTheEmperor#1907ScionOfTheEmperor#1907 Registered Users Posts: 509
    Core:
    Kislev,
    Ogre Kingdoms,
    Daemons of Chaos
    &
    Cathay (Could be DLC)
    Or
    Chaos Dwarfs (Could be DLC)


    DLC:
    Cathay (Could be Core),
    Chaos Dwarfs (Could be Core),
    Legions of Nagash,
    Southern Realms/Dogs of War,
    Khorne,
    Nurgle,
    Tzeentch
    &
    Slaanesh


    Unlikely DLC:
    Ind,
    Nippon,
    Snakemen of Kuresh,
    Kurgan/Hung
    &
    Fishmen.
  • LordSolarMach#5538LordSolarMach#5538 Registered Users Posts: 2,864

    I'm also not against monogods as DLC subfactions, but I think monos as 4 launch races is unlikely. And the game does try to follow 8th edition where possible, but expand beyond it in areas where it's not enough.

    Race wise, I'm hoping for Daemons Undivided at launch, and then two Campaign Packs featuring Hordes of Khorne vs Slaanesh and Nurgle vs Tzeentch. (With FLC ME godly Lords for Warriors Undivided rounding out that Race.)

    I would also be more than fine with Lord Packs adding godly Factions to Warriors of Chaos instead, with some borrowed recruitment of Daemons. Though doing this would miss out on Marked Gors, Rotters, etc. and limit the number of characters.

    (ie. the latter method probably gives us Skarbrand for DoC and Valkia for WoC, whereas the former could include them and also net us Arbaal and U'Zhul, or who-you-will.)
Sign In or Register to comment.