Great video. I haven't been paying warcry (or any gw/most minis games) in awhile (health issues) so I haven't had my finger on the pulse. I saw the title and it raised an eyebrow, but I remembered you/your channel was always pretty levelheaded so I gave it a watch. I'm happy I did. Really thought provoking tbh. I don't agree with every point made, but I really liked hearing your thoughts about this topic relevant to many games but specifically in reference to warcry. Appreciated how informative but also entertaining the vid was too. I almost want to push myself to get back into warcry just so i can contextualize your vids haha. Keep up the great work!
It is really mind-boggling that the majority of the products specifically for Warcry aren't at least the backbone for doing cool/competitive things in the game they are designed for.
I am reminded of my time dabbling in MMOs, over a decade ago, when the new class had to be better than everything, or else people wouldn't play it (even in co-op modes) and the developers wouldn't have the data necessary to eventually nerf it appropriately. It's how you have to do it, and I suppose in another sense the chasers of the new shiny can be given something as reward for subsidizing the fine-tuned version of our pastime. It's interesting that many of the best skirmish games (Mordheim, Necromunda, Relicblade, Frostgrave, etc.) are based around campaign play, wherein the balance of power will shift as events and pieces develop; while Warcry straddles the line, with a nifty but lightweight narrative mode (in which one is managing bench depth more than roster improvement), and a market that is obsessed with "competitive balance" and recoils from commitment. Warcry-specific factions are stuck in an odd place. It is reasonable to expect that one will have to purchase more than just one box of your faction in order to graduate into the full version of the game. It is not so reasonable to expect the customer to buy a second, identical $60 box from which he will take maybe three guys, leaving the rest on the sprue. Not sure where this leaves us. Booster packs? The failures are glaring because they have the model, and they largely follow it. It's Mordheim. You have your Leader (Leader), your Heroes (Specialists/Champions), and your Henchmen (chaff) to do the dirty work. It hasn't changed. They've even shown that they can make a mostly midrange faction that is popular, fun, and viable in the Vulkyn Flameseekers (who probably lose design points to the Darkoath because the latter don't have abilities based around a cutesy mascot pet that's crap). What you can't do is make a faction in which nobody is particularly good at doing anything that matters.
I think Warcry has a perfect fit in GWs lineup but I also think it's a problem for them that they haven't locked down players to their Warcry products. 90 % of my products are from AoS and Underworld that I use in WarCry. I think the majority are like me or also as you mentioned using proxies. When the pencil pushers looking at sales for the different lineups Warcry can't look that good. I hope GW just see it as a compliment for brining in players into their franchise and not necessarily as raw sales number.
@@HubrisLord you aren't the only person nervous about that. I think OMM did a survey where he found that while most people play with the casual mission cards, only some 15-20% of players go primarily bespoke.
Great video. In general would much rather see the designers focus on making bad stuff into fun and synergistic things instead of nerfing points on powerful things and reducing the number of cool things out there. Its also weird to rebalance points on underworlds warbands that new players usually cant buy..... this game is one of the best onramps into wargaming by its rules, but the good starting place right now is tricky for a new player to stumble onto, compared to all the new shiny traps that are overstocked at stores.
Feels like we’ve been in Ghur forever and the esthetic sucks, they need to take us to a new realm, drop a new terrain set and really dig deep to make some awesome new warbands that are gorgeous sculpts and that are competitive/fun to play, maybe expansions for the old Warcry factions or something. When ever I play nowadays I only play non-bespoke warbands. I’ll be honest the fire ghosts were the closest I’ve come to being interested in a bespoke warband in a looong time.
@@thesaltyseagames hell yeah, In the Unmade lore they mentioned a character called the “Flayed Prince” I really wanted them to come out with that model. I ended up kit bashing an Unmade Chaos wizard and unmade Chaos Gargant to add some more flavor to the Warband. I miss playing them, I might have to kit bash up a flayed prince and get in some games with the Unmade again.
Part of the problem is the beginner box perhaps. It does seem that GW skips asking important questions when it releases a product: Who is this for? How will they know that? How will we promote it? I agree that some power creep would generate discussion points.
@EarlofChutney That terrain in the beginner box was such a tough sell. To be fair I've seen it look really good when painted well, but it seemed like it failed to generate a ton of excitement
Which beginner box? I picked up the very first one with Iron Golem and Untamed Beasts, and thought it was great. I thought Catacombs was pretty cool and how it demanded a different strategic approach to list building and playing Warcry, but I think I am in the minority on that. I picked up the first Ghur box when it launched and it was okay, doubled down on Jade and Stone but gave up on Hunters of Haunchi, even with a Mizzenmaster thrown in. I have not bought a box since for the very reasons Dan mentioned, the warbands were mostly disappointing and the terrain dwindled to a couple or even just one big piece. Kind of heart broken this great game has been allowed to just wander in the wilderness.
On one hand, I understand why they expanded the game to allow players to use most of the AoS range as well as Underworlds, but the original appeal of it being a purely "chaos-flavored" game with new (and cool) chaos models is basically gone (or at least extremely watered-down). Not only that, it instantly created so much bloat, and to your point, they somehow did the opposite of what they should of done by making the Warcry specific warbands kind of mid and all the other AoS options, especially Underworlds, so much more interesting. Instead of acknowledging their mistake of sacrificing the original chaos-only concept for the money grab of allowing other AoS models and do a hard reboot, they try and course correct with a different type of bloat - rules bloat with Universal Blessings and then Battle Traits to try and get you to play mono-flavored warbands that aren't as exciting as mixing it up with Allies or non-Warcry specific warbands in general. That said, for comparison, you can add Genestealers in Necromunda, but the bulk of the range is unique to Necromunda. I think that was the original concept for Warcry too - unique (chaos) setting - and they should of stuck with it, but they got lazy and went the easy route for that quick money (in my opinion). But it kind of killed the game, or at least it's identity, at the same time. Now they are forced to make warbands that can appeal to AoS players and it just perpetuates the continued lack of uniqueness and loss of identity for Warcry in general.
Thanks for your insights. I find myself hoping more and more for a balanced one box bespoke format for 3rd edition (maybe with a rotating roster of warbands). I think it would bring back character to the game and allow bespoke warbands to function in a more synergistic way.
I hope we keep the wide listbuilding, but I would love for bespokes to transition to driving the game. Not sure how to reconcile that but I hope they achieve both at once.
I’d like to indeed see one box bespokes be better, but I am totally against a rotation of warbands. Part of the appeal of Warcry for me and my friends is being to use anything in our collections. Sure they may not be the best lists, but invalidating them is something I’ll always be against. I would be ok with abridging some profiles though for some faction to streamline the game a bit (especially for kits that literally aren’t sold anymore, but making sure they are still valid by sharing profiles with similar units).
You mean like Killteam is now? No thanks. Killteam can keep it. I like being able to build stuff I want, rather than GW telling me what I should do. But I am also a narrative player whose disdain for the entire competitive mindset is quite significant. The proposed killteam framework would absolutely kill this for me going forward; to the point where I would literally stop buying anything for the game. 100%
An interesting consideration that I feel like you didnt touch on is that GW is essentially immune to long term power creep in a way that mtg isnt with edition cycling. Who cares how wild things get at the end of an edition when everything can get reset without doing much harm to the game or community as a whole in like it would in mtg
I think power creep is very problematic in "eternal formats" (think formats without resets), as it basically forces consumers to constantly buy new shit. I especially hate it when a new release is basically identical to something that already exists, but is just slightly better, so you more or less have to replace the thing you own if you want to play competitively. In GW's games, I think power creep is much less problematic, as editions are getting shorter and shorter, and sure, sometimes a given meta is completely ruined for X months/years when power creep goes awol (Oko/Lurros to stick to the MtG example), but then the next release hits, and it's on to the next BroKEnTM thing. Also, just make the game fully digital, and meta ruining power creep can be instantly tuned down (copium). I know that you touched on most of these points in the vid, but I happen to share these beliefs. Finally, at least where I live, Warcry actually IS completely dead. The only reason people buy Warcry releases here is because they are sweet models, and sometimes they are great in AoS, which is very popular.
I think another part is the hobby side. Any fast, smaller scale game feels like something that should be easy to get into. Except now you need to learn to paint models. Compared to for example Star Wars: X-Wing getting started with Warcry is much more involved.
@Buiserd I've heard that rumor and I'd be ok with it, but I hope they keep the smooth gameplay of warcry. Mordheim has an incredible vibe but a lot of bookkeeping. Hopefully they can find a happy medium between the two systems.
@ oh I meant we keep the same rules set but the scenery set is a ruined cityscape and the warbands are clan Eshin vs ‘freeguild treasure hunter’ or something.
Thanks for saying what needs to be said. But as you mentioned, the GW product management hiearchy seems to just not give a shit what happens with Warcry or really care about what the community thinks or says. Or perhaps we are seeing an ongoing internal fight between the Warcry product group and some other product group that wants the resources allocated to Warcry. Thus not enough time and effort into developing Warcry warband mechanics (although the models are often really good) and not enough time for play testing. Perhaps there is a clue in that there is a World Championship for Underworlds but not Warcry? Oh well, thought I would comment to help your RUclips stats and let you know some of us are listening : )
@@thesaltyseagames The devour infection has some potential. It is also useable on your leader, so you can immediately attack with up to 10 dice. The doubles are also okay. The rest are bad, but most of the warbands has some crap abilities as well. My problem is the low wound and the lack of healing doubles with abilities which damage your fighters.
Great video! In most of the points I have to agree with you. However, I see the game as big trash for GW. You can throw here almost anything from AOS outside heroes and monsters and do not care much about it. People will just buy minis and play before they will go to AoS. I think that current Warcry is for huge nerds. It is a riddle to solve... to find optimal army list when there are so many options. IMO ironjawz are not as good as many people are thinking. Being one of the top players in Poland after testing them I will not take them for competetive game - it is quite easy to counter them. Last 4 bespoken warbands are joke. And as you said this is bad for Warcry, because we are not getting new players. The more I think about Warcry the more I see it as an old specialist game for hardcore fans.
Casual Warcry player here who has always wanted to go deeper on Warcry but finds competitive list building really unexciting (Bladeborn fighters should have been narrative-only). At this point I would be pretty happy for Warcry to go down the Kill Team route and have fixed lists because it's clear that GW can't support it as a product.
Wallet discipline... You know me so well sir, like insides of own pocket. You made my day.
@mlinert3129 lol stay strong sir!!!
Great video. I haven't been paying warcry (or any gw/most minis games) in awhile (health issues) so I haven't had my finger on the pulse.
I saw the title and it raised an eyebrow, but I remembered you/your channel was always pretty levelheaded so I gave it a watch. I'm happy I did. Really thought provoking tbh. I don't agree with every point made, but I really liked hearing your thoughts about this topic relevant to many games but specifically in reference to warcry. Appreciated how informative but also entertaining the vid was too. I almost want to push myself to get back into warcry just so i can contextualize your vids haha. Keep up the great work!
@@CyrusRiahi thanks so much for the kind words. Comments like this mean a lot to me.
It is really mind-boggling that the majority of the products specifically for Warcry aren't at least the backbone for doing cool/competitive things in the game they are designed for.
Loved this!
I am reminded of my time dabbling in MMOs, over a decade ago, when the new class had to be better than everything, or else people wouldn't play it (even in co-op modes) and the developers wouldn't have the data necessary to eventually nerf it appropriately. It's how you have to do it, and I suppose in another sense the chasers of the new shiny can be given something as reward for subsidizing the fine-tuned version of our pastime.
It's interesting that many of the best skirmish games (Mordheim, Necromunda, Relicblade, Frostgrave, etc.) are based around campaign play, wherein the balance of power will shift as events and pieces develop; while Warcry straddles the line, with a nifty but lightweight narrative mode (in which one is managing bench depth more than roster improvement), and a market that is obsessed with "competitive balance" and recoils from commitment. Warcry-specific factions are stuck in an odd place. It is reasonable to expect that one will have to purchase more than just one box of your faction in order to graduate into the full version of the game. It is not so reasonable to expect the customer to buy a second, identical $60 box from which he will take maybe three guys, leaving the rest on the sprue. Not sure where this leaves us. Booster packs?
The failures are glaring because they have the model, and they largely follow it. It's Mordheim. You have your Leader (Leader), your Heroes (Specialists/Champions), and your Henchmen (chaff) to do the dirty work. It hasn't changed. They've even shown that they can make a mostly midrange faction that is popular, fun, and viable in the Vulkyn Flameseekers (who probably lose design points to the Darkoath because the latter don't have abilities based around a cutesy mascot pet that's crap). What you can't do is make a faction in which nobody is particularly good at doing anything that matters.
I think Warcry has a perfect fit in GWs lineup but I also think it's a problem for them that they haven't locked down players to their Warcry products. 90 % of my products are from AoS and Underworld that I use in WarCry. I think the majority are like me or also as you mentioned using proxies. When the pencil pushers looking at sales for the different lineups Warcry can't look that good. I hope GW just see it as a compliment for brining in players into their franchise and not necessarily as raw sales number.
@@HubrisLord you aren't the only person nervous about that. I think OMM did a survey where he found that while most people play with the casual mission cards, only some 15-20% of players go primarily bespoke.
Great video. In general would much rather see the designers focus on making bad stuff into fun and synergistic things instead of nerfing points on powerful things and reducing the number of cool things out there. Its also weird to rebalance points on underworlds warbands that new players usually cant buy..... this game is one of the best onramps into wargaming by its rules, but the good starting place right now is tricky for a new player to stumble onto, compared to all the new shiny traps that are overstocked at stores.
Feels like we’ve been in Ghur forever and the esthetic sucks, they need to take us to a new realm, drop a new terrain set and really dig deep to make some awesome new warbands that are gorgeous sculpts and that are competitive/fun to play, maybe expansions for the old Warcry factions or something. When ever I play nowadays I only play non-bespoke warbands. I’ll be honest the fire ghosts were the closest I’ve come to being interested in a bespoke warband in a looong time.
@@earthenavenger i would really dig an Iron Golems expansion in a new setting. Maybe something tangentially tied to the Vermindoom.
@@thesaltyseagames hell yeah, In the Unmade lore they mentioned a character called the “Flayed Prince” I really wanted them to come out with that model. I ended up kit bashing an Unmade Chaos wizard and unmade Chaos Gargant to add some more flavor to the Warband. I miss playing them, I might have to kit bash up a flayed prince and get in some games with the Unmade again.
Part of the problem is the beginner box perhaps. It does seem that GW skips asking important questions when it releases a product: Who is this for? How will they know that? How will we promote it? I agree that some power creep would generate discussion points.
@EarlofChutney That terrain in the beginner box was such a tough sell. To be fair I've seen it look really good when painted well, but it seemed like it failed to generate a ton of excitement
Which beginner box? I picked up the very first one with Iron Golem and Untamed Beasts, and thought it was great. I thought Catacombs was pretty cool and how it demanded a different strategic approach to list building and playing Warcry, but I think I am in the minority on that. I picked up the first Ghur box when it launched and it was okay, doubled down on Jade and Stone but gave up on Hunters of Haunchi, even with a Mizzenmaster thrown in. I have not bought a box since for the very reasons Dan mentioned, the warbands were mostly disappointing and the terrain dwindled to a couple or even just one big piece. Kind of heart broken this great game has been allowed to just wander in the wilderness.
On one hand, I understand why they expanded the game to allow players to use most of the AoS range as well as Underworlds, but the original appeal of it being a purely "chaos-flavored" game with new (and cool) chaos models is basically gone (or at least extremely watered-down). Not only that, it instantly created so much bloat, and to your point, they somehow did the opposite of what they should of done by making the Warcry specific warbands kind of mid and all the other AoS options, especially Underworlds, so much more interesting.
Instead of acknowledging their mistake of sacrificing the original chaos-only concept for the money grab of allowing other AoS models and do a hard reboot, they try and course correct with a different type of bloat - rules bloat with Universal Blessings and then Battle Traits to try and get you to play mono-flavored warbands that aren't as exciting as mixing it up with Allies or non-Warcry specific warbands in general.
That said, for comparison, you can add Genestealers in Necromunda, but the bulk of the range is unique to Necromunda. I think that was the original concept for Warcry too - unique (chaos) setting - and they should of stuck with it, but they got lazy and went the easy route for that quick money (in my opinion). But it kind of killed the game, or at least it's identity, at the same time. Now they are forced to make warbands that can appeal to AoS players and it just perpetuates the continued lack of uniqueness and loss of identity for Warcry in general.
Obligatory Questor advocacy here :
The Questor Soulsworn are the G.O.A.T !
The true elites of elites ! 2.0 is better because of it !
@simonbergeron2520 Errant Questor with Grandhammer is one of my favorite fighters in Order.
Thanks for your insights. I find myself hoping more and more for a balanced one box bespoke format for 3rd edition (maybe with a rotating roster of warbands). I think it would bring back character to the game and allow bespoke warbands to function in a more synergistic way.
I hope we keep the wide listbuilding, but I would love for bespokes to transition to driving the game. Not sure how to reconcile that but I hope they achieve both at once.
I’d like to indeed see one box bespokes be better, but I am totally against a rotation of warbands. Part of the appeal of Warcry for me and my friends is being to use anything in our collections. Sure they may not be the best lists, but invalidating them is something I’ll always be against. I would be ok with abridging some profiles though for some faction to streamline the game a bit (especially for kits that literally aren’t sold anymore, but making sure they are still valid by sharing profiles with similar units).
You mean like Killteam is now? No thanks. Killteam can keep it. I like being able to build stuff I want, rather than GW telling me what I should do.
But I am also a narrative player whose disdain for the entire competitive mindset is quite significant.
The proposed killteam framework would absolutely kill this for me going forward; to the point where I would literally stop buying anything for the game. 100%
An interesting consideration that I feel like you didnt touch on is that GW is essentially immune to long term power creep in a way that mtg isnt with edition cycling. Who cares how wild things get at the end of an edition when everything can get reset without doing much harm to the game or community as a whole in like it would in mtg
That's a great point and I really wish I'd touched on it, bc it makes my case for more creep even stronger.
I think power creep is very problematic in "eternal formats" (think formats without resets), as it basically forces consumers to constantly buy new shit.
I especially hate it when a new release is basically identical to something that already exists, but is just slightly better, so you more or less have to replace the thing you own if you want to play competitively.
In GW's games, I think power creep is much less problematic, as editions are getting shorter and shorter, and sure, sometimes a given meta is completely ruined for X months/years when power creep goes awol (Oko/Lurros to stick to the MtG example), but then the next release hits, and it's on to the next BroKEnTM thing.
Also, just make the game fully digital, and meta ruining power creep can be instantly tuned down (copium).
I know that you touched on most of these points in the vid, but I happen to share these beliefs.
Finally, at least where I live, Warcry actually IS completely dead. The only reason people buy Warcry releases here is because they are sweet models, and sometimes they are great in AoS, which is very popular.
I think another part is the hobby side. Any fast, smaller scale game feels like something that should be easy to get into. Except now you need to learn to paint models. Compared to for example Star Wars: X-Wing getting started with Warcry is much more involved.
Hexbanes hunters sold themselves for sure
If they make Warcry 3.0 a Mordheim throwback (i.e Mordheim but AoSified) I'm sure they have a hit on their hands again.
@Buiserd I've heard that rumor and I'd be ok with it, but I hope they keep the smooth gameplay of warcry. Mordheim has an incredible vibe but a lot of bookkeeping. Hopefully they can find a happy medium between the two systems.
@ oh I meant we keep the same rules set but the scenery set is a ruined cityscape and the warbands are clan Eshin vs ‘freeguild treasure hunter’ or something.
Thanks for saying what needs to be said. But as you mentioned, the GW product management hiearchy seems to just not give a shit what happens with Warcry or really care about what the community thinks or says.
Or perhaps we are seeing an ongoing internal fight between the Warcry product group and some other product group that wants the resources allocated to Warcry. Thus not enough time and effort into developing Warcry warband mechanics (although the models are often really good) and not enough time for play testing.
Perhaps there is a clue in that there is a World Championship for Underworlds but not Warcry?
Oh well, thought I would comment to help your RUclips stats and let you know some of us are listening : )
I already have a sylvaneth force. I was going to buy the corrupted ones but they seemed kind of lacking rules wise by comparison.
They are cool but they need a re-write for their abilities, or a major points drop.
@@thesaltyseagames The devour infection has some potential. It is also useable on your leader, so you can immediately attack with up to 10 dice. The doubles are also okay.
The rest are bad, but most of the warbands has some crap abilities as well.
My problem is the low wound and the lack of healing doubles with abilities which damage your fighters.
Great video! In most of the points I have to agree with you. However, I see the game as big trash for GW. You can throw here almost anything from AOS outside heroes and monsters and do not care much about it. People will just buy minis and play before they will go to AoS. I think that current Warcry is for huge nerds. It is a riddle to solve... to find optimal army list when there are so many options. IMO ironjawz are not as good as many people are thinking. Being one of the top players in Poland after testing them I will not take them for competetive game - it is quite easy to counter them.
Last 4 bespoken warbands are joke. And as you said this is bad for Warcry, because we are not getting new players. The more I think about Warcry the more I see it as an old specialist game for hardcore fans.
@@pawelzuchowski836 i hadn't thought about it, but I agree Warcry is currently for addicts more than an intro game.
as a bonereaper player I was exicted about Teratic Cohort until I saw their stats...very disappointing
Casual Warcry player here who has always wanted to go deeper on Warcry but finds competitive list building really unexciting (Bladeborn fighters should have been narrative-only). At this point I would be pretty happy for Warcry to go down the Kill Team route and have fixed lists because it's clear that GW can't support it as a product.